"The Russian Blue" book, anyone?

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 03:29:24 GMT, Victor Martinez >
wrote:

>Tropical Tim wrote:
>> Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
>> trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
>
>Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
>where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him. Add
>him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
>ratio in this group.
>
>Cheers.

Stupid Troll!

--
Bob.

Your IQ score is 2 (it takes 3 to grunt).

Projecting our desires and habits on God is poor logic. Unless you can find
Gospels by Ronald McDonald and Colonel Sanders, or even recommendations in
Leviticus requiring us to eat me, you can't just say anything we are in the
habit of doing is God's will. If you want to go that route, you'd better be
eating kosher. Even if you are writing from an orthodox kibbutz, I hate to
say it, but the best you can claim for God's existence is "a popular
character from an established literary tradition."

Setting aside the issue of God's existence at all, which is far from
conclusive, the animals that you mention weren't "put on earth" by anyone.
Cows and chickens were not found wandering alone in a field by a lucky
proto-farmer caveman, they were selective bred by humans. Where, exactly, do
you imagine wild herds of black angus and jersey cows are roaming, with
flocks of feral chickens roaming overhead? Would that be the Garden of Eden?

Technically, cats are not domesticates. Unlike cows, chickens, dogs, sheep,
and pigs, selective breeding has not drastically altered the genetic makeup
of housecats. You can go to areas in South Africa and Europe and still find
native wild cats (not feral ones) that are genetically indistinguishable
from the ones we keep as pets. The correct term, unflattering as it is, for
cats, is "exploited captive," although my cats seem more like "exploitive
captives." "The Character of Cats: The Origins, Behavior, and Stratagems of
Felis silvestris catus" by Stephen Budiansky is an interesting book about
cats that talks about how their behaviors and genetics weren't shaped by
humans, Egyptians or otherwise, but, rather, cats just luckily had natural
tendencies that made it easy for them to fit into human society, like
pigeons, crows, and rats, only more popular. Of course, this is assuming
that you don't think that all valid knowledge comes from one book in sore
need of revision, if it should not just be allowed to go "out of print."

--
Ferris Germane >

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> (snipped Everything it was dumb)
>
> Okay why do you think god put all these animals on earth? To eat. Cows
are
> here to eat. Chickens are here to eat and give us eggs. Do you think
cows
> are here to deplete the ozone layer with their farty gas? Is that why
their
> here? If you want to fight something how about extinction? People kill
> gorrila's for bush meat. Or how about people killing tiger's for their
fur?
> Why not let people be people and not get on their backs about eating meat.
> The sheep need to be sheared in the summer otherwise they get to hot.
> People long ago figured that out. What about the vegtables you eat. Do
you
> think they like to be eaten? They probably have feelings to you know they
> grow. Just go on what you believe and stop trying to push it on other
> people. It's okay to let your cat outside as long as it's in a controled
> environment. Some people build cat cages, some leash train their cats ,
> some who have big properties let them out to roam. You have to remember
> that cats used to be wild before the Egyptians took em in and domesticated
> them.
>
> That's my piece.
>
> Tina
>
>

Projecting our desires and habits on God is poor logic. Unless you can find
Gospels by Ronald McDonald and Colonel Sanders, or even recommendations in
Leviticus requiring us to eat me, you can't just say anything we are in the
habit of doing is God's will. If you want to go that route, you'd better be
eating kosher. Even if you are writing from an orthodox kibbutz, I hate to
say it, but the best you can claim for God's existence is "a popular
character from an established literary tradition."

Setting aside the issue of God's existence at all, which is far from
conclusive, the animals that you mention weren't "put on earth" by anyone.
Cows and chickens were not found wandering alone in a field by a lucky
proto-farmer caveman, they were selective bred by humans. Where, exactly, do
you imagine wild herds of black angus and jersey cows are roaming, with
flocks of feral chickens roaming overhead? Would that be the Garden of Eden?

Technically, cats are not domesticates. Unlike cows, chickens, dogs, sheep,
and pigs, selective breeding has not drastically altered the genetic makeup
of housecats. You can go to areas in South Africa and Europe and still find
native wild cats (not feral ones) that are genetically indistinguishable
from the ones we keep as pets. The correct term, unflattering as it is, for
cats, is "exploited captive," although my cats seem more like "exploitive
captives." "The Character of Cats: The Origins, Behavior, and Stratagems of
Felis silvestris catus" by Stephen Budiansky is an interesting book about
cats that talks about how their behaviors and genetics weren't shaped by
humans, Egyptians or otherwise, but, rather, cats just luckily had natural
tendencies that made it easy for them to fit into human society, like
pigeons, crows, and rats, only more popular. Of course, this is assuming
that you don't think that all valid knowledge comes from one book in sore
need of revision, if it should not just be allowed to go "out of print."

--
Ferris Germane >

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> (snipped Everything it was dumb)
>
> Okay why do you think god put all these animals on earth? To eat. Cows
are
> here to eat. Chickens are here to eat and give us eggs. Do you think
cows
> are here to deplete the ozone layer with their farty gas? Is that why
their
> here? If you want to fight something how about extinction? People kill
> gorrila's for bush meat. Or how about people killing tiger's for their
fur?
> Why not let people be people and not get on their backs about eating meat.
> The sheep need to be sheared in the summer otherwise they get to hot.
> People long ago figured that out. What about the vegtables you eat. Do
you
> think they like to be eaten? They probably have feelings to you know they
> grow. Just go on what you believe and stop trying to push it on other
> people. It's okay to let your cat outside as long as it's in a controled
> environment. Some people build cat cages, some leash train their cats ,
> some who have big properties let them out to roam. You have to remember
> that cats used to be wild before the Egyptians took em in and domesticated
> them.
>
> That's my piece.
>
> Tina
>
>

I just want to know why, if Tropical Tim is such a rabid, vegan terrorist
with such strong revulsion to eating meat, that he keeps a carnivorous pet?
If he is so concerned about the longevity of his cat, does he allow his cat
to eat the meat diet it evolved to eat while denying himself a similarly
evolutionarily appropriate diet, or does he feed his cat only soy and other
vegan-appropriate food and thereby reduce his cat's life expectancy even
more than going outside would?

Perhaps Tropical Tim is just posing as a vegan fundamentalist to somehow
make Bob's position seem hypocritical, like you must either assume the vegan
lifestyle or be cruel to animals.

I have some bad news for vegans and PETA weenies: life is predicated on
death. We all die. Animals die. Humans die. Cats have evolved to require a
meat-based diet. Humans have the technology to live without eating animal
products but such a diet could never be called "natural." For vegans who
want to dispute this, explain to me how any low-tech culture could get
enough B-12 in their diets, assuming they were not Indonesians who had
discovered tempeh? Humans kill animals and so do cats and other wild
animals. Try watching a tribe of chimps track and kill another kind of
monkey and a farmer beheading a chicken with a hatchet seems pretty humane.
Animals can be raised, slaughtered, and eating in a morally responsible way.
Humans evolved as omnivores, whether our own violent tendencies, existential
helplessness, and eventual deaths frighten neurotic animal rights activists
or not.

We need to treat livestock better. Current animal farming practices need to
be drastically reformed for healthier livestock and healthier meat and dairy
consumers, but to claim that eating unfertilized eggs is inhumane is like
claiming that menstruating instead of being pregnant is murdering a baby.
Tropical Tim, you've amped up your hysteria a few notches too high. You are
so worried about winning this petty ****ing contest that you are making
ridiculous claims. Why don't you take a deep breath and unclench your
sphincter, pet your cat, and try to find something more important to succeed
at than winning an irrelevant argument on a newsgroup? Your life can't be
this empty. If you care about animals, find just one to help instead of
ranting on newsgroups, being ****ed off all the time, and making people
worry that someone's slipping through the cracks of the mental health
system.

Regardless of who "wins" any argument here, everyone will keep their cats in
or let them out as they see best, not according to what you and Bob deduce.

--
Ferris Germane >

"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
om...
> Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
>...
> > On 7 Jan 2004 09:07:09 -0800, (Tropical Tim)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
>...
> > >> On 3 Jan 2004 09:58:24 -0800, (Tracy) wrote:
> > >>
> >
> > >> There are NO valid reasons for keeping a healthy cat indoors 24/7.
> > >> There may, in your area, be very valid reasons for not keeping a cat.
> > >
> > >In your opinion.
> >
> > No, not in my opinion - in the opinion of most of the world's leading
> > cat experts.
>
> No it isn't. You don't know what you're talking about. I will give you
> the actual information.
>
> "Cats who live solely outdoors live about three to five years on
> average, while the average life expectancy of indoor cats is 14 years
> or longer."
>
> Everyone on the group can go to:
> http://petplace.netscape.com/articles/artShow.asp?artID=1726
> and see the real data. Let's see, 1200 of the top vets in the US and
> Canada use a site that promotes inside living for cats. I see that
> your little island isn't mentioned. Oh, thats right, Canada and the US
> both surpass your backwards little island in technology. No wonder
> your empire is now so tiny.
> >
> > >In my opinion and millions of other cat owners, it's
> > >a blessing to a cat to have a nice comfortable home with loving people
> > >and other animals to play with.
> >
> > Of course it is - but it is also a basic necessity in a cat's life to
> > have time outside.
>
> No it isn't. A domesicated feline isn't even aware that there is such
> a thing as "outside" until it experiences it. It's not part of any
> domesticated felines basics. The instinctual flight or fright coding
> that is part of every animals brain functions does not include a
> memory of "Outside". Just the same as a television with a human. You
> can't miss what you have never experienced.
> >
> > > They don't have to worry about getting
> > >run over by humans
> >
> > That risk may be large in some areas, though not in most. Where it is
> > it would not be a suitable place to keep cats.
>
> In todays socity, it is no longer suitable or humane to allow a pet
> cat to ever go outside without careful consideration. Your fantasy of
> the "wild cat" as out of date as your monarchy.
> >
> > > or abused by human kids or aimed at by weird people
> >
> > Both, thankfully, VERY rare.
>
> Not rare at all. You don't know what you're talking about again.
> >
> > >who even brag about thier effort. They are protected from the
> > >parasites like fleas,
> >
> > No, even indoor only cats get fleas.
>
> I've had cats indoors only for 30 years and have never had any flea
> problem. Of course, you have to treat your house so fleas that humans
> bring in will die. None of my cats have ever had a flea on them.
> >
> > > worms and ticks. They can eat a strict, healthy
> > >diet without worrying about some butthead poisening them. And last but
> > >not least, it is a proven fact that a 24/7 inside cat will live almost
> > >twice as long as an outside cat because of the above mentioned dangers
> > >to outside cats.
> >
> > No it isn't. That is a blatant lie that can be disproved so very
> > easily. There is little, if indeed any, difference in the life
> > expectancy of an indoor only cat and an indoor/outdoor cat.
>
> What crap! You are the liar. I've shown my proof above. You just talk.
>
> > >
> > >Bob, do you wear leather? Wool? Do you eat animal flesh? If you do,
> > >then I say you are an animal abuser. When is the last time you ate
> > >some veal..baby cow?
> >
> > Leather and wool are byproducts,
>
> Byproducts? You are really in la la land buddy. Do you think that
> leather is only harvested from cows that die from old age? You think
> that scaring a sheep out of it's mind, flipping it around and shaving
> all of it's natual protection from it's body is not cruel to the
> sheep? Where the hell do you get your idea of fairness, from the
> butcher shop where the corpses of perfectly happy living cows are
> ground into a paste of flesh that you stick into your mouth?
>
> wool does not even result in the
> > death of the animal. I eat very little meat and certainly not veal.
>
> Oh, so if you eat the flesh of just a few murdered animals it's ok?
> Thats like someone saying "Well, I only murdered a few people, there
> are lots of others".
> You talk out of both sides of your mouth man.
> >
> > However, in all cases I promote the correct housing and treatment of
> > animals - their quality of life is important.
>
> Bull****! Start talking to the people who provide you with your nasty
> flesh eating supply of murdered animals. Go to a slauter house. See
> how fair it is then.
> > >
> > >Do you eat unborn chickens?
> >
> > No.
>
> You've never eaten an egg huh? Liar.
> >
> > > Yeah, I bet you do. Thats discusting. You
> > >eat bread? You do know that unborn chickens are used in that nasty
> > >stuff don't you?
> >
> > No they are not.
>
> You are too stupid to realize that eggs are used in the processing of
> breads and cakes?
> >
> > >After seeing your waistline, I can imagine how many deserts you've
> > >eaten with the massive amounts of milk that was intended by nature to
> > >be eaten by the little veal producers you call supper.
> > >
> > >If you are not a strict vegitarian and do not use or consume ANY
> > >animal parts, then you are a hypocrite and an animal abuser in the
> > >worst sense.
> >
> > Not at all. While it is sad that animals dies to feed people, as long
> > as they are kept in suitable conditions and killed humanely it is not
> > cruel.
>
> It's not cruel because bobby wants to eat the flesh of animals. Yeah
> right!
> How can one KILL an animal for the sole purpose of eating it's flesh
> and call it humane?
>
> You are as perverted as anyone who is a flesh eater. You justify your
> sick cravings as being normal. Like I said, go to a slauter house just
> before your next meal of hot cooked flesh and see if you still want to
> eat like a caveman.
> >
> > Keeping a cat indoors 24/7 is CRUEL.
>
> NO IT'S NOT!
> To shorten their happy little lives by two thirds by letting them go
> out into the world that humans have made into a cesspool is cruel. You
> are cruel. Stop it! Take the crown off of your stupid little british
> head and try to educate yourself into the correct century.
> > >
> > >What makes cats the only creature you protect? You are so full of
> > >crap.
> >
> > Cat are NOT the only creature I protect - In some ways I even protect
> > animal abusers like you as I do not believe in the death penalty -
> > just life in prison.
> >
> > I repeat. If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel
> > unable to allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some
> > time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a
> > cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you
> > are being cruel, selfish, or both.
> >
> > I think you posts prove you are both.
>
> I don't care what a perverted flesh eater like you thinks of how I
> treat animals. Hell man, you eat them. You condone the murder of
> millions of animals each day.
>
> It is NEVER ok to let your cat outside. To do so are being cruel,
> selfish, or both.
>
> Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.

I just want to know why, if Tropical Tim is such a rabid, vegan terrorist
with such strong revulsion to eating meat, that he keeps a carnivorous pet?
If he is so concerned about the longevity of his cat, does he allow his cat
to eat the meat diet it evolved to eat while denying himself a similarly
evolutionarily appropriate diet, or does he feed his cat only soy and other
vegan-appropriate food and thereby reduce his cat's life expectancy even
more than going outside would?

Perhaps Tropical Tim is just posing as a vegan fundamentalist to somehow
make Bob's position seem hypocritical, like you must either assume the vegan
lifestyle or be cruel to animals.

I have some bad news for vegans and PETA weenies: life is predicated on
death. We all die. Animals die. Humans die. Cats have evolved to require a
meat-based diet. Humans have the technology to live without eating animal
products but such a diet could never be called "natural." For vegans who
want to dispute this, explain to me how any low-tech culture could get
enough B-12 in their diets, assuming they were not Indonesians who had
discovered tempeh? Humans kill animals and so do cats and other wild
animals. Try watching a tribe of chimps track and kill another kind of
monkey and a farmer beheading a chicken with a hatchet seems pretty humane.
Animals can be raised, slaughtered, and eating in a morally responsible way.
Humans evolved as omnivores, whether our own violent tendencies, existential
helplessness, and eventual deaths frighten neurotic animal rights activists
or not.

We need to treat livestock better. Current animal farming practices need to
be drastically reformed for healthier livestock and healthier meat and dairy
consumers, but to claim that eating unfertilized eggs is inhumane is like
claiming that menstruating instead of being pregnant is murdering a baby.
Tropical Tim, you've amped up your hysteria a few notches too high. You are
so worried about winning this petty ****ing contest that you are making
ridiculous claims. Why don't you take a deep breath and unclench your
sphincter, pet your cat, and try to find something more important to succeed
at than winning an irrelevant argument on a newsgroup? Your life can't be
this empty. If you care about animals, find just one to help instead of
ranting on newsgroups, being ****ed off all the time, and making people
worry that someone's slipping through the cracks of the mental health
system.

Regardless of who "wins" any argument here, everyone will keep their cats in
or let them out as they see best, not according to what you and Bob deduce.

--
Ferris Germane >

"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
om...
> Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
>...
> > On 7 Jan 2004 09:07:09 -0800, (Tropical Tim)
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
>...
> > >> On 3 Jan 2004 09:58:24 -0800, (Tracy) wrote:
> > >>
> >
> > >> There are NO valid reasons for keeping a healthy cat indoors 24/7.
> > >> There may, in your area, be very valid reasons for not keeping a cat.
> > >
> > >In your opinion.
> >
> > No, not in my opinion - in the opinion of most of the world's leading
> > cat experts.
>
> No it isn't. You don't know what you're talking about. I will give you
> the actual information.
>
> "Cats who live solely outdoors live about three to five years on
> average, while the average life expectancy of indoor cats is 14 years
> or longer."
>
> Everyone on the group can go to:
> http://petplace.netscape.com/articles/artShow.asp?artID=1726
> and see the real data. Let's see, 1200 of the top vets in the US and
> Canada use a site that promotes inside living for cats. I see that
> your little island isn't mentioned. Oh, thats right, Canada and the US
> both surpass your backwards little island in technology. No wonder
> your empire is now so tiny.
> >
> > >In my opinion and millions of other cat owners, it's
> > >a blessing to a cat to have a nice comfortable home with loving people
> > >and other animals to play with.
> >
> > Of course it is - but it is also a basic necessity in a cat's life to
> > have time outside.
>
> No it isn't. A domesicated feline isn't even aware that there is such
> a thing as "outside" until it experiences it. It's not part of any
> domesticated felines basics. The instinctual flight or fright coding
> that is part of every animals brain functions does not include a
> memory of "Outside". Just the same as a television with a human. You
> can't miss what you have never experienced.
> >
> > > They don't have to worry about getting
> > >run over by humans
> >
> > That risk may be large in some areas, though not in most. Where it is
> > it would not be a suitable place to keep cats.
>
> In todays socity, it is no longer suitable or humane to allow a pet
> cat to ever go outside without careful consideration. Your fantasy of
> the "wild cat" as out of date as your monarchy.
> >
> > > or abused by human kids or aimed at by weird people
> >
> > Both, thankfully, VERY rare.
>
> Not rare at all. You don't know what you're talking about again.
> >
> > >who even brag about thier effort. They are protected from the
> > >parasites like fleas,
> >
> > No, even indoor only cats get fleas.
>
> I've had cats indoors only for 30 years and have never had any flea
> problem. Of course, you have to treat your house so fleas that humans
> bring in will die. None of my cats have ever had a flea on them.
> >
> > > worms and ticks. They can eat a strict, healthy
> > >diet without worrying about some butthead poisening them. And last but
> > >not least, it is a proven fact that a 24/7 inside cat will live almost
> > >twice as long as an outside cat because of the above mentioned dangers
> > >to outside cats.
> >
> > No it isn't. That is a blatant lie that can be disproved so very
> > easily. There is little, if indeed any, difference in the life
> > expectancy of an indoor only cat and an indoor/outdoor cat.
>
> What crap! You are the liar. I've shown my proof above. You just talk.
>
> > >
> > >Bob, do you wear leather? Wool? Do you eat animal flesh? If you do,
> > >then I say you are an animal abuser. When is the last time you ate
> > >some veal..baby cow?
> >
> > Leather and wool are byproducts,
>
> Byproducts? You are really in la la land buddy. Do you think that
> leather is only harvested from cows that die from old age? You think
> that scaring a sheep out of it's mind, flipping it around and shaving
> all of it's natual protection from it's body is not cruel to the
> sheep? Where the hell do you get your idea of fairness, from the
> butcher shop where the corpses of perfectly happy living cows are
> ground into a paste of flesh that you stick into your mouth?
>
> wool does not even result in the
> > death of the animal. I eat very little meat and certainly not veal.
>
> Oh, so if you eat the flesh of just a few murdered animals it's ok?
> Thats like someone saying "Well, I only murdered a few people, there
> are lots of others".
> You talk out of both sides of your mouth man.
> >
> > However, in all cases I promote the correct housing and treatment of
> > animals - their quality of life is important.
>
> Bull****! Start talking to the people who provide you with your nasty
> flesh eating supply of murdered animals. Go to a slauter house. See
> how fair it is then.
> > >
> > >Do you eat unborn chickens?
> >
> > No.
>
> You've never eaten an egg huh? Liar.
> >
> > > Yeah, I bet you do. Thats discusting. You
> > >eat bread? You do know that unborn chickens are used in that nasty
> > >stuff don't you?
> >
> > No they are not.
>
> You are too stupid to realize that eggs are used in the processing of
> breads and cakes?
> >
> > >After seeing your waistline, I can imagine how many deserts you've
> > >eaten with the massive amounts of milk that was intended by nature to
> > >be eaten by the little veal producers you call supper.
> > >
> > >If you are not a strict vegitarian and do not use or consume ANY
> > >animal parts, then you are a hypocrite and an animal abuser in the
> > >worst sense.
> >
> > Not at all. While it is sad that animals dies to feed people, as long
> > as they are kept in suitable conditions and killed humanely it is not
> > cruel.
>
> It's not cruel because bobby wants to eat the flesh of animals. Yeah
> right!
> How can one KILL an animal for the sole purpose of eating it's flesh
> and call it humane?
>
> You are as perverted as anyone who is a flesh eater. You justify your
> sick cravings as being normal. Like I said, go to a slauter house just
> before your next meal of hot cooked flesh and see if you still want to
> eat like a caveman.
> >
> > Keeping a cat indoors 24/7 is CRUEL.
>
> NO IT'S NOT!
> To shorten their happy little lives by two thirds by letting them go
> out into the world that humans have made into a cesspool is cruel. You
> are cruel. Stop it! Take the crown off of your stupid little british
> head and try to educate yourself into the correct century.
> > >
> > >What makes cats the only creature you protect? You are so full of
> > >crap.
> >
> > Cat are NOT the only creature I protect - In some ways I even protect
> > animal abusers like you as I do not believe in the death penalty -
> > just life in prison.
> >
> > I repeat. If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel
> > unable to allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some
> > time each day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a
> > cat. To have a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you
> > are being cruel, selfish, or both.
> >
> > I think you posts prove you are both.
>
> I don't care what a perverted flesh eater like you thinks of how I
> treat animals. Hell man, you eat them. You condone the murder of
> millions of animals each day.
>
> It is NEVER ok to let your cat outside. To do so are being cruel,
> selfish, or both.
>
> Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.

[Victor Martinez]

Tina Laitinen wrote:
> How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?

It depends on the client you're using to read news. Check out the
"filters" functionality of your client, probably under the Tools menu.

--
Victor Martinez
Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
Send your spam here:
Email me here:

[Victor Martinez]

Tina Laitinen wrote:
> How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?

It depends on the client you're using to read news. Check out the
"filters" functionality of your client, probably under the Tools menu.

--
Victor Martinez
Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
Send your spam here:
Email me here:

[Chester]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> "Victor Martinez" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Tropical Tim wrote:
> > > Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> > > trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
> >
> > Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
> > where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him. Add
> > him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
> > ratio in this group.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > --
> > Victor Martinez
> > Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
> > Send your spam here:
> > Email me here:
>
> How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?
>
> Tina
>
>

If you're using "Outlook Express" click on MESSAGE and then BLOCK SENDER. A
box will come up, if you click YES then all posts by the offender should be
wiped from you news reader.

--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

[Chester]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> "Victor Martinez" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Tropical Tim wrote:
> > > Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> > > trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
> >
> > Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
> > where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him. Add
> > him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
> > ratio in this group.
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> > --
> > Victor Martinez
> > Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
> > Send your spam here:
> > Email me here:
>
> How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?
>
> Tina
>
>

If you're using "Outlook Express" click on MESSAGE and then BLOCK SENDER. A
box will come up, if you click YES then all posts by the offender should be
wiped from you news reader.

--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

In my version of Outlook Express, I don't get the option to block a user by
clicking or right-clicking on a message. I need to click on the message to
select it, then choose Message>Block Sender from the menu.

I am using Outlook Express 6, which came with Windows XP.

--
Ferris Germane >

"Chester" > wrote in message
news:GNHLb.38827$ts4.9502@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > "Victor Martinez" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Tropical Tim wrote:
> > > > Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> > > > trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
> > >
> > > Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
> > > where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him.
Add
> > > him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
> > > ratio in this group.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Victor Martinez
> > > Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
> > > Send your spam here:
> > > Email me here:
> >
> > How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?
> >
> > Tina
> >
> >
>
> If you're using "Outlook Express" click on MESSAGE and then BLOCK SENDER.
A
> box will come up, if you click YES then all posts by the offender should
be
> wiped from you news reader.
>
> --
> Chester
> http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/
>
> My psychiatrist said. . .
> "Positive results within a year, or your mania back."
>
>

In my version of Outlook Express, I don't get the option to block a user by
clicking or right-clicking on a message. I need to click on the message to
select it, then choose Message>Block Sender from the menu.

I am using Outlook Express 6, which came with Windows XP.

--
Ferris Germane >

"Chester" > wrote in message
news:GNHLb.38827$ts4.9502@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > "Victor Martinez" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Tropical Tim wrote:
> > > > Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> > > > trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
> > >
> > > Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
> > > where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him.
Add
> > > him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
> > > ratio in this group.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Victor Martinez
> > > Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
> > > Send your spam here:
> > > Email me here:
> >
> > How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?
> >
> > Tina
> >
> >
>
> If you're using "Outlook Express" click on MESSAGE and then BLOCK SENDER.
A
> box will come up, if you click YES then all posts by the offender should
be
> wiped from you news reader.
>
> --
> Chester
> http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/
>
> My psychiatrist said. . .
> "Positive results within a year, or your mania back."
>
>

[Tina Laitinen]

"Chester" > wrote in message
news:GNHLb.38827$ts4.9502@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > "Victor Martinez" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Tropical Tim wrote:
> > > > Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> > > > trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
> > >
> > > Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
> > > where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him.
Add
> > > him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
> > > ratio in this group.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Victor Martinez
> > > Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
> > > Send your spam here:
> > > Email me here:
> >
> > How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?
> >
> > Tina
> >
> >
>
> If you're using "Outlook Express" click on MESSAGE and then BLOCK SENDER.
A
> box will come up, if you click YES then all posts by the offender should
be
> wiped from you news reader.
>
> --
> Chester
> http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/
>
> My psychiatrist said. . .
> "Positive results within a year, or your mania back."
>
>

Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you can
use? Download for free?

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

"Chester" > wrote in message
news:GNHLb.38827$ts4.9502@pd7tw3no...
>
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > "Victor Martinez" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Tropical Tim wrote:
> > > > Your posts show you to be ignorant, cruel, selfish and stupid. Stop
> > > > trying to convert decent people into your sick way of life.
> > >
> > > Stop trying to reason with this guy. He lives in a parallel universe,
> > > where facts are whatever he imagines. Most of us simply ignore him.
Add
> > > him to your killfile, it will dramatically reduce the noise to signal
> > > ratio in this group.
> > >
> > > Cheers.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Victor Martinez
> > > Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
> > > Send your spam here:
> > > Email me here:
> >
> > How do you do that.. Add someone to your kill file?
> >
> > Tina
> >
> >
>
> If you're using "Outlook Express" click on MESSAGE and then BLOCK SENDER.
A
> box will come up, if you click YES then all posts by the offender should
be
> wiped from you news reader.
>
> --
> Chester
> http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/
>
> My psychiatrist said. . .
> "Positive results within a year, or your mania back."
>
>

Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you can
use? Download for free?

Tina

[Victor Martinez]

Tina Laitinen wrote:
> Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you can
> use? Download for free?

I use Mozilla Thunderbird (mozilla.com).

--
Victor Martinez
Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
Send your spam here:
Email me here:

[Victor Martinez]

Tina Laitinen wrote:
> Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you can
> use? Download for free?

I use Mozilla Thunderbird (mozilla.com).

--
Victor Martinez
Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM)
Send your spam here:
Email me here:

[Nina S.]

Jellicoe > wrote in message
om...
>
> Maybe in some areas the life expectancy is lower because the hazards
> are so high, but then people in those areas shouldn't get cats. They
> should get indoor pets like rats.

So, basically you are saying that the millions of cats, and kittens, brought
to shelters every year should be euthanized simply because they had the bad
luck of being born, or brought into, a city. Sure, that makes a whole lot of
sense. Sure would help the overpopulation problem, wouldn't it? Or, if we're
talking of no-kill shelters, they live the remainder of their lives in a
cage, indoors.

> But in many places, the danger is not high,

Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
"progress" are making those places extremely rare.

Sure, I'd love to allow my cats access to the great outdoors, but from what
I've seen in this area, (and I'm not talking about just my neighborhood),
it's far to dangerous for that.

Nina

[Nina S.]

Jellicoe > wrote in message
om...
>
> Maybe in some areas the life expectancy is lower because the hazards
> are so high, but then people in those areas shouldn't get cats. They
> should get indoor pets like rats.

So, basically you are saying that the millions of cats, and kittens, brought
to shelters every year should be euthanized simply because they had the bad
luck of being born, or brought into, a city. Sure, that makes a whole lot of
sense. Sure would help the overpopulation problem, wouldn't it? Or, if we're
talking of no-kill shelters, they live the remainder of their lives in a
cage, indoors.

> But in many places, the danger is not high,

Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
"progress" are making those places extremely rare.

Sure, I'd love to allow my cats access to the great outdoors, but from what
I've seen in this area, (and I'm not talking about just my neighborhood),
it's far to dangerous for that.

Nina

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:25:50 GMT, "Nina S." >
wrote:

>
>Jellicoe > wrote in message
om...
>>
>> Maybe in some areas the life expectancy is lower because the hazards
>> are so high, but then people in those areas shouldn't get cats. They
>> should get indoor pets like rats.
>
>So, basically you are saying that the millions of cats, and kittens, brought
>to shelters every year should be euthanized simply because they had the bad
>luck of being born, or brought into, a city.

Nonononono! Anyone who said that must really be a moron.

> Sure, that makes a whole lot of
>sense. Sure would help the overpopulation problem, wouldn't it? Or, if we're
>talking of no-kill shelters, they live the remainder of their lives in a
>cage, indoors.

There is no reason for cats to live indoors 24/7, and there is not
reason for shelters to kill healthy cats.

If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
>
>> But in many places, the danger is not high,
>
>Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
>"progress" are making those places extremely rare.

Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
if they lived in the country.

Cats live with cars very well in cities, not quite so well in the
country.
>
>Sure, I'd love to allow my cats access to the great outdoors, but from what
>I've seen in this area, (and I'm not talking about just my neighborhood),
>it's far to dangerous for that.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.
>
>Nina
>
--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:25:50 GMT, "Nina S." >
wrote:

>
>Jellicoe > wrote in message
om...
>>
>> Maybe in some areas the life expectancy is lower because the hazards
>> are so high, but then people in those areas shouldn't get cats. They
>> should get indoor pets like rats.
>
>So, basically you are saying that the millions of cats, and kittens, brought
>to shelters every year should be euthanized simply because they had the bad
>luck of being born, or brought into, a city.

Nonononono! Anyone who said that must really be a moron.

> Sure, that makes a whole lot of
>sense. Sure would help the overpopulation problem, wouldn't it? Or, if we're
>talking of no-kill shelters, they live the remainder of their lives in a
>cage, indoors.

There is no reason for cats to live indoors 24/7, and there is not
reason for shelters to kill healthy cats.

If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
>
>> But in many places, the danger is not high,
>
>Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
>"progress" are making those places extremely rare.

Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
if they lived in the country.

Cats live with cars very well in cities, not quite so well in the
country.
>
>Sure, I'd love to allow my cats access to the great outdoors, but from what
>I've seen in this area, (and I'm not talking about just my neighborhood),
>it's far to dangerous for that.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.
>
>Nina
>
--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Nina S.]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:25:50 GMT, "Nina S." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Jellicoe > wrote in message
> om...
> >>
> >> Maybe in some areas the life expectancy is lower because the hazards
> >> are so high, but then people in those areas shouldn't get cats. They
> >> should get indoor pets like rats.
> >
> >So, basically you are saying that the millions of cats, and kittens,
brought
> >to shelters every year should be euthanized simply because they had the
bad
> >luck of being born, or brought into, a city.
>
> Nonononono! Anyone who said that must really be a moron.
>
> > Sure, that makes a whole lot of
> >sense. Sure would help the overpopulation problem, wouldn't it? Or, if
we're
> >talking of no-kill shelters, they live the remainder of their lives in a
> >cage, indoors.
>
> There is no reason for cats to live indoors 24/7, and there is not
> reason for shelters to kill healthy cats.
>
> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.

*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these same
shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
where would the cats be? Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
be in cages living out miserable lives.

> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
> >
> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
>
> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> if they lived in the country.

Do not call me a liar until you know what you are talking about. How long
have you lived in the States?
Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do not
believe for a minute), how many of these cats would be able to live there?

Nina

[Nina S.]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 19:25:50 GMT, "Nina S." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Jellicoe > wrote in message
> om...
> >>
> >> Maybe in some areas the life expectancy is lower because the hazards
> >> are so high, but then people in those areas shouldn't get cats. They
> >> should get indoor pets like rats.
> >
> >So, basically you are saying that the millions of cats, and kittens,
brought
> >to shelters every year should be euthanized simply because they had the
bad
> >luck of being born, or brought into, a city.
>
> Nonononono! Anyone who said that must really be a moron.
>
> > Sure, that makes a whole lot of
> >sense. Sure would help the overpopulation problem, wouldn't it? Or, if
we're
> >talking of no-kill shelters, they live the remainder of their lives in a
> >cage, indoors.
>
> There is no reason for cats to live indoors 24/7, and there is not
> reason for shelters to kill healthy cats.
>
> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.

*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these same
shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
where would the cats be? Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
be in cages living out miserable lives.

> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
> >
> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
>
> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> if they lived in the country.

Do not call me a liar until you know what you are talking about. How long
have you lived in the States?
Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do not
believe for a minute), how many of these cats would be able to live there?

Nina

[Linda Terrell]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:28:54 UTC, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:


>
> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> if they lived in the country.
>
> Cats live with cars very well in cities, not quite so well in the
> country.

Liar.

> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
> cruel, selfish, or both.
> >

Liar




--

[Linda Terrell]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:28:54 UTC, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:


>
> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> if they lived in the country.
>
> Cats live with cars very well in cities, not quite so well in the
> country.

Liar.

> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
> cruel, selfish, or both.
> >

Liar




--

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
wrote:

>> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
>> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
>> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
>> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
>
>*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these same
>shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
>where would the cats be?

Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.

>Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
>be in cages living out miserable lives.

No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.
>
>> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
>> >
>> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
>> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
>>
>> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
>> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
>> if they lived in the country.
>
>Do not call me a liar

I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.

>until you know what you are talking about. How long
>have you lived in the States?
>Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do not
>believe for a minute),

Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.

> how many of these cats would be able to live there?

As many as people want to live there.
>
>Nina

In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
wrote:

>> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
>> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
>> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
>> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
>
>*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these same
>shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
>where would the cats be?

Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.

>Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
>be in cages living out miserable lives.

No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.
>
>> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
>> >
>> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
>> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
>>
>> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
>> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
>> if they lived in the country.
>
>Do not call me a liar

I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.

>until you know what you are talking about. How long
>have you lived in the States?
>Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do not
>believe for a minute),

Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.

> how many of these cats would be able to live there?

As many as people want to live there.
>
>Nina

In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:58:44 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:28:54 UTC, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
>> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
>> if they lived in the country.
>>
>> Cats live with cars very well in cities, not quite so well in the
>> country.
>
>Liar.

Stupid Troll.
>
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
>> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
>> cruel, selfish, or both.
>> >
>
>Liar

Very Stupid Troll.

--
Bob.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:58:44 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 20:28:54 UTC, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
>> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
>> if they lived in the country.
>>
>> Cats live with cars very well in cities, not quite so well in the
>> country.
>
>Liar.

Stupid Troll.
>
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
>> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
>> cruel, selfish, or both.
>> >
>
>Liar

Very Stupid Troll.

--
Bob.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.

[Tina Laitinen]

Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think everyone
is a troll.

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think everyone
is a troll.

Tina

[Hans Schrøder]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think everyone
> is a troll.
>

Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is not
a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...

Hans

[Hans Schrøder]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
>
> Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think everyone
> is a troll.
>

Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is not
a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...

Hans

[Tina Laitinen]

"Hans Schrøder" > wrote in message
...
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think
everyone
> > is a troll.
> >
>
> Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is
not
> a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>
> Hans
>
>

So Bob is a Troll himself?

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

"Hans Schrøder" > wrote in message
...
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think
everyone
> > is a troll.
> >
>
> Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is
not
> a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>
> Hans
>
>

So Bob is a Troll himself?

Tina

[Hans Schrøder]

"Hans Schrøder" > wrote in message
...
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think
everyone
> > is a troll.
> >
>
> Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is
not
> a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>
> Hans
>

In Norwegian: "På seg selv kjenner man andre" This is the translators'
challenge for today...

:-)
Hans

[Hans Schrøder]

"Hans Schrøder" > wrote in message
...
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> .cable.rogers.com...
> >
> >
> > Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think
everyone
> > is a troll.
> >
>
> Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is
not
> a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>
> Hans
>

In Norwegian: "På seg selv kjenner man andre" This is the translators'
challenge for today...

:-)
Hans

[Hans Schrøder]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
> So Bob is a Troll himself?
>

He sure is!

Hans

[Hans Schrøder]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>
> So Bob is a Troll himself?
>

He sure is!

Hans

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 05:14:02 +0100, "Hans Schrøder"
> wrote:

>"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>>
>>
>> Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think everyone
>> is a troll.
>>
>
>Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is not
>a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>
>Hans
>

Stupid Troll.

--
Bob.

Your IQ score is 2 (it takes 3 to grunt).

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 05:14:02 +0100, "Hans Schrøder"
> wrote:

>"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...
>>
>>
>> Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think everyone
>> is a troll.
>>
>
>Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is not
>a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>
>Hans
>

Stupid Troll.

--
Bob.

Your IQ score is 2 (it takes 3 to grunt).

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 04:14:59 GMT, "Tina Laitinen"
> wrote:

>
>
>"Hans Schrøder" > wrote in message
...
>> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
>> .cable.rogers.com...
>> >
>> >
>> > Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think
>everyone
>> > is a troll.
>> >
>>
>> Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is
>not
>> a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>
>So Bob is a Troll himself?
>
>Tina
>
Stupid Troll.

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 04:14:59 GMT, "Tina Laitinen"
> wrote:

>
>
>"Hans Schrøder" > wrote in message
...
>> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
>> .cable.rogers.com...
>> >
>> >
>> > Sometimes I think Bob you like the word Troll. You seem to think
>everyone
>> > is a troll.
>> >
>>
>> Of course! You look at others the same way you look at yourself. Bob is
>not
>> a man to discuss with, Bob is a man to ignore and avoid...
>>
>> Hans
>>
>>
>
>So Bob is a Troll himself?
>
>Tina
>
Stupid Troll.

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Linda Terrell]

...liar...

[Linda Terrell]

...liar...

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:15:19 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> wrote:

>..liar...
>
You are - and an animal abuser to boot.

--
Bob.

Artificial intelligence is no match for your natural stupidity.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 15:15:19 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> wrote:

>..liar...
>
You are - and an animal abuser to boot.

--
Bob.

Artificial intelligence is no match for your natural stupidity.

[Nina S.]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
> wrote:
>
> >> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
> >> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
> >> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
> >> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
> >
> >*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these
same
> >shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
> >where would the cats be?
>
> Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.

Hmmm, in the middle of a city? How will the cats enter and exit highrise
apartment buildings? Just call for an elevator? Sure, that will work. Or,
maybe some of the lower income residents could adopt. But, most have barely
enough money to cloth and feed themselves and their family let alone
ensuring proper care for a cat. According to you neither of those options
would work, so now the shelters are filled to capacity...and then some
because, once again, according to you, these are not proper homes for a cat.
So, what becomes of the cats? If they aren't euthanized because of not
enough suitable homes, then they are caged one on top of another.
>
> >Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
> >be in cages living out miserable lives.
>
> No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.

Where? According to you only residents of the UK can provide suitable homes.
Is that the answer? We send all the homeless cats to the UK?
> >
> >> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
> >> >
> >> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
> >> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
> >>
> >> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> >> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> >> if they lived in the country.
> >
> >Do not call me a liar
>
> I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.

Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't.
>
> >until you know what you are talking about. How long
> >have you lived in the States?
> >Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do
not
> >believe for a minute),
>
> Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.

Anyone, even a child could argue your "facts".
>
> > how many of these cats would be able to live there?
>
> As many as people want to live there.

Huh?
> >
> >Nina
>
> In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
> and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
> more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
> city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
> dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
> nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.

Sickness, disease, early death. Is that what you have in mind?
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
> friends so they may learn as well.

What lesson?

Nina

[Nina S.]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
> wrote:
>
> >> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
> >> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
> >> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
> >> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
> >
> >*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these
same
> >shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
> >where would the cats be?
>
> Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.

Hmmm, in the middle of a city? How will the cats enter and exit highrise
apartment buildings? Just call for an elevator? Sure, that will work. Or,
maybe some of the lower income residents could adopt. But, most have barely
enough money to cloth and feed themselves and their family let alone
ensuring proper care for a cat. According to you neither of those options
would work, so now the shelters are filled to capacity...and then some
because, once again, according to you, these are not proper homes for a cat.
So, what becomes of the cats? If they aren't euthanized because of not
enough suitable homes, then they are caged one on top of another.
>
> >Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
> >be in cages living out miserable lives.
>
> No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.

Where? According to you only residents of the UK can provide suitable homes.
Is that the answer? We send all the homeless cats to the UK?
> >
> >> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
> >> >
> >> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
> >> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
> >>
> >> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> >> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> >> if they lived in the country.
> >
> >Do not call me a liar
>
> I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.

Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't.
>
> >until you know what you are talking about. How long
> >have you lived in the States?
> >Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do
not
> >believe for a minute),
>
> Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.

Anyone, even a child could argue your "facts".
>
> > how many of these cats would be able to live there?
>
> As many as people want to live there.

Huh?
> >
> >Nina
>
> In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
> and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
> more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
> city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
> dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
> nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.

Sickness, disease, early death. Is that what you have in mind?
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
> friends so they may learn as well.

What lesson?

Nina

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:04:44 GMT, "Nina S." >
wrote:

>
>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
...
>> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
>> >> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
>> >> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
>> >> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
>> >
>> >*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these
>same
>> >shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
>> >where would the cats be?
>>
>> Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.
>
>Hmmm, in the middle of a city? How will the cats enter and exit highrise
>apartment buildings?

Cats are not suitable pets for people who live in such building - in
fact very few animals are.

>Just call for an elevator? Sure, that will work. Or,
>maybe some of the lower income residents could adopt. But, most have barely
>enough money to cloth and feed themselves and their family let alone
>ensuring proper care for a cat.

Surely lower income and high-rise go together.

> According to you neither of those options
>would work, so now the shelters are filled to capacity...and then some
>because, once again, according to you, these are not proper homes for a cat.

True, but then there are plenty of other homes.

>So, what becomes of the cats? If they aren't euthanized because of not
>enough suitable homes, then they are caged one on top of another.

There are found PROPER homes, ones where they can spend at least some
time most days outside.
>>
>> >Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
>> >be in cages living out miserable lives.
>>
>> No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.
>
>Where? According to you only residents of the UK can provide suitable homes.

Whatever gave you that idea? Most countries in the world treat cats as
the should be treated - it is really only in the USA, and to a lesser
extent Canada, where this myth that the cat can be kept indoors 24/7
has grown.

>Is that the answer? We send all the homeless cats to the UK?

No - you find them proper homes in your country.
>> >
>> >> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
>> >> >
>> >> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
>> >> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
>> >>
>> >> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
>> >> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
>> >> if they lived in the country.
>> >
>> >Do not call me a liar
>>
>> I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.
>
>Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't.

It is easy - Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you
will find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would
be if they lived in the country. It really is SO easy - all you have
to do is take the blinkers off.
>>
>> >until you know what you are talking about. How long
>> >have you lived in the States?
>> >Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do
>not
>> >believe for a minute),
>>
>> Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.
>
>Anyone, even a child could argue your "facts".

No dear, facts are facts, and facts always win in the end.
>>
>> > how many of these cats would be able to live there?
>>
>> As many as people want to live there.
>
>Huh?
>> >
>> >Nina
>>
>> In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
>> and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
>> more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
>> city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
>> dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
>> nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.
>
>Sickness, disease, early death. Is that what you have in mind?

Early death? The average for feral cats in the USA is now considered
to be 7 years. About the same as their wild ancestors. And yet most of
the feral cats live in cities.

Those that get vet care and feeding may live to be 10 or 12 - so it is
hardly that dangerous for them.

True, a cared for indoor/outdoor cat should be able to make at least
15 these days, with many making well over 20. However, you cannot
claim city life is so dangerous for cats because the cats of the world
prove you wrong.
>>
>> --
>> Bob.
>>
>> You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
>> friends so they may learn as well.
>
>What lesson?
>
>Nina
>
>
>
--
Bob.

A cat without claws is the result of a vet without scruples and an
owner without love.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:04:44 GMT, "Nina S." >
wrote:

>
>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
...
>> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
>> >> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of the
>> >> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
>> >> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
>> >
>> >*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these
>same
>> >shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors 24/7,
>> >where would the cats be?
>>
>> Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.
>
>Hmmm, in the middle of a city? How will the cats enter and exit highrise
>apartment buildings?

Cats are not suitable pets for people who live in such building - in
fact very few animals are.

>Just call for an elevator? Sure, that will work. Or,
>maybe some of the lower income residents could adopt. But, most have barely
>enough money to cloth and feed themselves and their family let alone
>ensuring proper care for a cat.

Surely lower income and high-rise go together.

> According to you neither of those options
>would work, so now the shelters are filled to capacity...and then some
>because, once again, according to you, these are not proper homes for a cat.

True, but then there are plenty of other homes.

>So, what becomes of the cats? If they aren't euthanized because of not
>enough suitable homes, then they are caged one on top of another.

There are found PROPER homes, ones where they can spend at least some
time most days outside.
>>
>> >Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
>> >be in cages living out miserable lives.
>>
>> No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.
>
>Where? According to you only residents of the UK can provide suitable homes.

Whatever gave you that idea? Most countries in the world treat cats as
the should be treated - it is really only in the USA, and to a lesser
extent Canada, where this myth that the cat can be kept indoors 24/7
has grown.

>Is that the answer? We send all the homeless cats to the UK?

No - you find them proper homes in your country.
>> >
>> >> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
>> >> >
>> >> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
>> >> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
>> >>
>> >> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
>> >> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
>> >> if they lived in the country.
>> >
>> >Do not call me a liar
>>
>> I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.
>
>Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't.

It is easy - Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you
will find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would
be if they lived in the country. It really is SO easy - all you have
to do is take the blinkers off.
>>
>> >until you know what you are talking about. How long
>> >have you lived in the States?
>> >Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I do
>not
>> >believe for a minute),
>>
>> Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.
>
>Anyone, even a child could argue your "facts".

No dear, facts are facts, and facts always win in the end.
>>
>> > how many of these cats would be able to live there?
>>
>> As many as people want to live there.
>
>Huh?
>> >
>> >Nina
>>
>> In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
>> and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
>> more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
>> city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
>> dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
>> nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.
>
>Sickness, disease, early death. Is that what you have in mind?

Early death? The average for feral cats in the USA is now considered
to be 7 years. About the same as their wild ancestors. And yet most of
the feral cats live in cities.

Those that get vet care and feeding may live to be 10 or 12 - so it is
hardly that dangerous for them.

True, a cared for indoor/outdoor cat should be able to make at least
15 these days, with many making well over 20. However, you cannot
claim city life is so dangerous for cats because the cats of the world
prove you wrong.
>>
>> --
>> Bob.
>>
>> You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
>> friends so they may learn as well.
>
>What lesson?
>
>Nina
>
>
>
--
Bob.

A cat without claws is the result of a vet without scruples and an
owner without love.

[moonglow minnow]

Tina Laitinen howled at the moon, then scrawled thusly upon the aether:

> Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you
> can use? Download for free?
>
> Tina

www.thefreesite.com has several links. Searching google (www.google.com)
for "free newsreader" would probably get you quite a few programs to browse
through as well. I'm personally a fan of Xnews (which has a very nice
single-keystroke killfile) and Forte Free Agent (which doesn't have a
killfile, but is easier to learn how to use than Xnews).

Maeve
--
throw the baby out with the bathwater to reply by e-mail
~*~ http://volatiledreams.deep-ice.com ~*~

You're not right. You just *sound* right.

[moonglow minnow]

Tina Laitinen howled at the moon, then scrawled thusly upon the aether:

> Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you
> can use? Download for free?
>
> Tina

www.thefreesite.com has several links. Searching google (www.google.com)
for "free newsreader" would probably get you quite a few programs to browse
through as well. I'm personally a fan of Xnews (which has a very nice
single-keystroke killfile) and Forte Free Agent (which doesn't have a
killfile, but is easier to learn how to use than Xnews).

Maeve
--
throw the baby out with the bathwater to reply by e-mail
~*~ http://volatiledreams.deep-ice.com ~*~

You're not right. You just *sound* right.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:54:48 +0000, Mike Hunt > wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:42:53 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>
>>It is easy - Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you
>>will find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would
>>be if they lived in the country. It really is SO easy - all you have
>>to do is take the blinkers off.
>>>>
>
>Er no, here in Central London is certainly NOT an environment for a
>cat.
>
>I've lost more cats here (well, 3) due to urban hazards e.g. cars,
>foxes, toxic substances etc. than I did when I lived in South-East
>England (Rye, to be precise) so that statement is pure bull****.

For many years I spent a large part of my time in Central London, and
even just of the main A4 where I stayed there were lots of cats - most
of the growing old with the freedom to roam.

While, theoretically, it is possible for a really hungry fox to attack
a cat, I've never seen a recorded incident and certainly not in
Central London.

During the mid 80s I often used to be going back to the hotel around 4
or 5am, at that time there were a lot of cats out and about. I also
used to volunteer some weekends at Battersea and quite often saw
people reunited with cats that had just "hopped on a bus".

Oh, and you should see the ones that have learnt to wait for the
crossing signs to go green - heard of several of those in London (and
for that matter a couple of other cities.

Let's take Brum. I know someone who helped in resettling several feral
groups when the started to knock the old Bull Ring down - within a
couple of months there were quite a few cats on the building site,
being petted by builders as the demolition and rebuilding went on
around them.

Are cats killed in cities - of course they are. But the risks to the
average cat are quite low, while in the country they are, hard as it
may be for you to believe, a fare bit higher.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:54:48 +0000, Mike Hunt > wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 23:42:53 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>
>>It is easy - Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you
>>will find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would
>>be if they lived in the country. It really is SO easy - all you have
>>to do is take the blinkers off.
>>>>
>
>Er no, here in Central London is certainly NOT an environment for a
>cat.
>
>I've lost more cats here (well, 3) due to urban hazards e.g. cars,
>foxes, toxic substances etc. than I did when I lived in South-East
>England (Rye, to be precise) so that statement is pure bull****.

For many years I spent a large part of my time in Central London, and
even just of the main A4 where I stayed there were lots of cats - most
of the growing old with the freedom to roam.

While, theoretically, it is possible for a really hungry fox to attack
a cat, I've never seen a recorded incident and certainly not in
Central London.

During the mid 80s I often used to be going back to the hotel around 4
or 5am, at that time there were a lot of cats out and about. I also
used to volunteer some weekends at Battersea and quite often saw
people reunited with cats that had just "hopped on a bus".

Oh, and you should see the ones that have learnt to wait for the
crossing signs to go green - heard of several of those in London (and
for that matter a couple of other cities.

Let's take Brum. I know someone who helped in resettling several feral
groups when the started to knock the old Bull Ring down - within a
couple of months there were quite a few cats on the building site,
being petted by builders as the demolition and rebuilding went on
around them.

Are cats killed in cities - of course they are. But the risks to the
average cat are quite low, while in the country they are, hard as it
may be for you to believe, a fare bit higher.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Tina Laitinen]

Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:04:44 GMT, "Nina S." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
> >> >> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of
the
> >> >> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
> >> >> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
> >> >
> >> >*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these
> >same
> >> >shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors
24/7,
> >> >where would the cats be?
> >>
> >> Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.
> >
> >Hmmm, in the middle of a city? How will the cats enter and exit highrise
> >apartment buildings?
>
> Cats are not suitable pets for people who live in such building - in
> fact very few animals are.
>
> >Just call for an elevator? Sure, that will work. Or,
> >maybe some of the lower income residents could adopt. But, most have
barely
> >enough money to cloth and feed themselves and their family let alone
> >ensuring proper care for a cat.
>
> Surely lower income and high-rise go together.
>
> > According to you neither of those options
> >would work, so now the shelters are filled to capacity...and then some
> >because, once again, according to you, these are not proper homes for a
cat.
>
> True, but then there are plenty of other homes.
>
> >So, what becomes of the cats? If they aren't euthanized because of not
> >enough suitable homes, then they are caged one on top of another.
>
> There are found PROPER homes, ones where they can spend at least some
> time most days outside.
> >>
> >> >Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
> >> >be in cages living out miserable lives.
> >>
> >> No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.
> >
> >Where? According to you only residents of the UK can provide suitable
homes.
>
> Whatever gave you that idea? Most countries in the world treat cats as
> the should be treated - it is really only in the USA, and to a lesser
> extent Canada, where this myth that the cat can be kept indoors 24/7
> has grown.
>
> >Is that the answer? We send all the homeless cats to the UK?
>
> No - you find them proper homes in your country.
> >> >
> >> >> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
> >> >> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
> >> >>
> >> >> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> >> >> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> >> >> if they lived in the country.
> >> >
> >> >Do not call me a liar
> >>
> >> I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.
> >
> >Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't.
>
> It is easy - Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you
> will find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would
> be if they lived in the country. It really is SO easy - all you have
> to do is take the blinkers off.
> >>
> >> >until you know what you are talking about. How long
> >> >have you lived in the States?
> >> >Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I
do
> >not
> >> >believe for a minute),
> >>
> >> Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.
> >
> >Anyone, even a child could argue your "facts".
>
> No dear, facts are facts, and facts always win in the end.
> >>
> >> > how many of these cats would be able to live there?
> >>
> >> As many as people want to live there.
> >
> >Huh?
> >> >
> >> >Nina
> >>
> >> In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
> >> and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
> >> more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
> >> city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
> >> dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
> >> nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.
> >
> >Sickness, disease, early death. Is that what you have in mind?
>
> Early death? The average for feral cats in the USA is now considered
> to be 7 years. About the same as their wild ancestors. And yet most of
> the feral cats live in cities.
>
> Those that get vet care and feeding may live to be 10 or 12 - so it is
> hardly that dangerous for them.
>
> True, a cared for indoor/outdoor cat should be able to make at least
> 15 these days, with many making well over 20. However, you cannot
> claim city life is so dangerous for cats because the cats of the world
> prove you wrong.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bob.
> >>
> >> You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
> >> friends so they may learn as well.
> >
> >What lesson?
> >
> >Nina
> >
> >
> >
> --
> Bob.
>
> A cat without claws is the result of a vet without scruples and an
> owner without love.
>
Troll... Stupid Troll.

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 19:04:44 GMT, "Nina S." >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 21:56:45 GMT, "Nina S." >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >> If the lazy good-for-nothings who run a large number of US shelters
> >> >> would actually get off their fat arses and work for the welfare of
the
> >> >> cats in their care - ALL shelters will be no-kill and ALL shelters
> >> >> would refuse to home a healthy cat to an indoor only home.
> >> >
> >> >*Sigh* You just don't get it. If all shelters were no-kill, and these
> >same
> >> >shelters refused adoption simply because the cat would be indoors
24/7,
> >> >where would the cats be?
> >>
> >> Why - in proper indoor/outdoor homes of course.
> >
> >Hmmm, in the middle of a city? How will the cats enter and exit highrise
> >apartment buildings?
>
> Cats are not suitable pets for people who live in such building - in
> fact very few animals are.
>
> >Just call for an elevator? Sure, that will work. Or,
> >maybe some of the lower income residents could adopt. But, most have
barely
> >enough money to cloth and feed themselves and their family let alone
> >ensuring proper care for a cat.
>
> Surely lower income and high-rise go together.
>
> > According to you neither of those options
> >would work, so now the shelters are filled to capacity...and then some
> >because, once again, according to you, these are not proper homes for a
cat.
>
> True, but then there are plenty of other homes.
>
> >So, what becomes of the cats? If they aren't euthanized because of not
> >enough suitable homes, then they are caged one on top of another.
>
> There are found PROPER homes, ones where they can spend at least some
> time most days outside.
> >>
> >> >Especially city cats? Let me tell you. They would
> >> >be in cages living out miserable lives.
> >>
> >> No, they would be found proper homes - as they are in other countries.
> >
> >Where? According to you only residents of the UK can provide suitable
homes.
>
> Whatever gave you that idea? Most countries in the world treat cats as
> the should be treated - it is really only in the USA, and to a lesser
> extent Canada, where this myth that the cat can be kept indoors 24/7
> has grown.
>
> >Is that the answer? We send all the homeless cats to the UK?
>
> No - you find them proper homes in your country.
> >> >
> >> >> >> But in many places, the danger is not high,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Maybe where you live but, in my neck of the woods "development" and
> >> >> >"progress" are making those places extremely rare.
> >> >>
> >> >> Liar. Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you will
> >> >> find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would be
> >> >> if they lived in the country.
> >> >
> >> >Do not call me a liar
> >>
> >> I will call you a liar and long as you go on lying.
> >
> >Prove it. Oh, that's right, you can't.
>
> It is easy - Go to the centre of any major city in the world and you
> will find an environment that is actually safer for cats than it would
> be if they lived in the country. It really is SO easy - all you have
> to do is take the blinkers off.
> >>
> >> >until you know what you are talking about. How long
> >> >have you lived in the States?
> >> >Assuming that there are safer areas in the hearts of cities, (which I
do
> >not
> >> >believe for a minute),
> >>
> >> Hard luck, facts are facts and you can't argue with them.
> >
> >Anyone, even a child could argue your "facts".
>
> No dear, facts are facts, and facts always win in the end.
> >>
> >> > how many of these cats would be able to live there?
> >>
> >> As many as people want to live there.
> >
> >Huh?
> >> >
> >> >Nina
> >>
> >> In the hearts of modern cities the car now moves slower than the horse
> >> and cart did at the start of the last century. There is also, now,
> >> more green spaces then there was a hundred years ago. Life in a modern
> >> city can be almost cat heaven as a cat's world is very three
> >> dimensional. No other animal is as well suited to urban life - if
> >> nothing else the thriving feral populations prove that.
> >
> >Sickness, disease, early death. Is that what you have in mind?
>
> Early death? The average for feral cats in the USA is now considered
> to be 7 years. About the same as their wild ancestors. And yet most of
> the feral cats live in cities.
>
> Those that get vet care and feeding may live to be 10 or 12 - so it is
> hardly that dangerous for them.
>
> True, a cared for indoor/outdoor cat should be able to make at least
> 15 these days, with many making well over 20. However, you cannot
> claim city life is so dangerous for cats because the cats of the world
> prove you wrong.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Bob.
> >>
> >> You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
> >> friends so they may learn as well.
> >
> >What lesson?
> >
> >Nina
> >
> >
> >
> --
> Bob.
>
> A cat without claws is the result of a vet without scruples and an
> owner without love.
>
Troll... Stupid Troll.

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

"moonglow minnow" > wrote in message
.4...
> Tina Laitinen howled at the moon, then scrawled thusly upon the aether:
>
> > Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you
> > can use? Download for free?
> >
> > Tina
>
> www.thefreesite.com has several links. Searching google (www.google.com)
> for "free newsreader" would probably get you quite a few programs to
browse
> through as well. I'm personally a fan of Xnews (which has a very nice
> single-keystroke killfile) and Forte Free Agent (which doesn't have a
> killfile, but is easier to learn how to use than Xnews).
>
> Maeve
> --
> throw the baby out with the bathwater to reply by e-mail
> ~*~ http://volatiledreams.deep-ice.com ~*~
>
> You're not right. You just *sound* right.
>
>

Thanks I'll take a look.

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

"moonglow minnow" > wrote in message
.4...
> Tina Laitinen howled at the moon, then scrawled thusly upon the aether:
>
> > Cool thanks I am using outlook express. Is there anyother program you
> > can use? Download for free?
> >
> > Tina
>
> www.thefreesite.com has several links. Searching google (www.google.com)
> for "free newsreader" would probably get you quite a few programs to
browse
> through as well. I'm personally a fan of Xnews (which has a very nice
> single-keystroke killfile) and Forte Free Agent (which doesn't have a
> killfile, but is easier to learn how to use than Xnews).
>
> Maeve
> --
> throw the baby out with the bathwater to reply by e-mail
> ~*~ http://volatiledreams.deep-ice.com ~*~
>
> You're not right. You just *sound* right.
>
>

Thanks I'll take a look.

Tina

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 03:03:07 GMT, "Tina Laitinen"
> wrote:

>> A cat without claws is the result of a vet without scruples and an
>> owner without love.
>>
>Troll... Stupid Troll.

you are - get treatment for it.

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 03:03:07 GMT, "Tina Laitinen"
> wrote:

>> A cat without claws is the result of a vet without scruples and an
>> owner without love.
>>
>Troll... Stupid Troll.

you are - get treatment for it.

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Chester]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
able.rogers.com...
>
> "Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:20:39 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >> > Bob.
> > >> >
> > >> > The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can
> be
> > >> > summed up in one word -- YOU.
> > >>
> > >> With such a creative conversation you could as well get married right
> away!
> > >>
> > >> Hans
> > >> (and his two indoor cats)
> > >>
> > >
> > >Nah, my cats would never let Benchley in the house.
> > >
> > >LT
> >
> > Do shut up you stupid troll.
> >
> > --
> > Bob.
> >
> > I read your mind, and believe me, it was a short story...
>
> TROLLLLLLLL
> TROLLLLLLLLLL IN THE NEWSGROUP
> TROOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
>
> Just though you'd like to know
> (faints)
>
> Tina
>
>
Tina,
I caught the Harry Potter reference. Hehehehehe, cute.


--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

[Chester]

"Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
able.rogers.com...
>
> "Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:20:39 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >> > Bob.
> > >> >
> > >> > The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can
> be
> > >> > summed up in one word -- YOU.
> > >>
> > >> With such a creative conversation you could as well get married right
> away!
> > >>
> > >> Hans
> > >> (and his two indoor cats)
> > >>
> > >
> > >Nah, my cats would never let Benchley in the house.
> > >
> > >LT
> >
> > Do shut up you stupid troll.
> >
> > --
> > Bob.
> >
> > I read your mind, and believe me, it was a short story...
>
> TROLLLLLLLL
> TROLLLLLLLLLL IN THE NEWSGROUP
> TROOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
>
> Just though you'd like to know
> (faints)
>
> Tina
>
>
Tina,
I caught the Harry Potter reference. Hehehehehe, cute.


--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

[Tina Laitinen]

"Chester" > wrote in message
news:tIIMb.74640$X%5.74131@pd7tw2no...
>
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> able.rogers.com...
> >
> > "Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:20:39 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >> > Bob.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid
can
> > be
> > > >> > summed up in one word -- YOU.
> > > >>
> > > >> With such a creative conversation you could as well get married
right
> > away!
> > > >>
> > > >> Hans
> > > >> (and his two indoor cats)
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >Nah, my cats would never let Benchley in the house.
> > > >
> > > >LT
> > >
> > > Do shut up you stupid troll.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bob.
> > >
> > > I read your mind, and believe me, it was a short story...
> >
> > TROLLLLLLLL
> > TROLLLLLLLLLL IN THE NEWSGROUP
> > TROOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
> >
> > Just though you'd like to know
> > (faints)
> >
> > Tina
> >
> >
> Tina,
> I caught the Harry Potter reference. Hehehehehe, cute.
>
>
> --
> Chester
> http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/
>
> My psychiatrist said. . .
> "Positive results within a year, or your mania back."


Hehehe... The new movies comming out in June I hear and the new Sherk is
comming out in May. I can't wait.. I love those 2 movies!!

Tina

[Tina Laitinen]

"Chester" > wrote in message
news:tIIMb.74640$X%5.74131@pd7tw2no...
>
> "Tina Laitinen" > wrote in message
> able.rogers.com...
> >
> > "Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 13:20:39 GMT, "Linda Terrell"
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >> > Bob.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid
can
> > be
> > > >> > summed up in one word -- YOU.
> > > >>
> > > >> With such a creative conversation you could as well get married
right
> > away!
> > > >>
> > > >> Hans
> > > >> (and his two indoor cats)
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >Nah, my cats would never let Benchley in the house.
> > > >
> > > >LT
> > >
> > > Do shut up you stupid troll.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bob.
> > >
> > > I read your mind, and believe me, it was a short story...
> >
> > TROLLLLLLLL
> > TROLLLLLLLLLL IN THE NEWSGROUP
> > TROOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
> >
> > Just though you'd like to know
> > (faints)
> >
> > Tina
> >
> >
> Tina,
> I caught the Harry Potter reference. Hehehehehe, cute.
>
>
> --
> Chester
> http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/
>
> My psychiatrist said. . .
> "Positive results within a year, or your mania back."


Hehehe... The new movies comming out in June I hear and the new Sherk is
comming out in May. I can't wait.. I love those 2 movies!!

Tina

[*SooZy*]

"hotep" > wrote in message
...
> In alt.pets.cats Ivor Jones > wrote:
>
> : I still and will always maintain a cat should be allowed to do as it
> : pleases, if it wants to go out, it should be allowed to. If you don't
want
> : it to, or you live in an area where it is *unsafe* for a cat to be
> : outside, you should not have one.
>
>
>
> If a cat always did what it pleased, it sure would never be neutered.
>
> Aren't there several breeds that are domesticated to the point that
> they can't/won't defend themselves from other cats outside?
>

yes like the Ragdoll....

I used to let my old cat out as we lived away from busy roads, he used the
dog flap so the cat and dogs could come in and out of the garden as they
pleased 24/7, I had to move (personal reasons) and where I am now (no
garden), no way could I let a cat out, but rather than keeping him in which
I feel would be cruel to him, as he was used to being able to come and go as
he pleased, I gave him to a close friend. He settled into her place just
fine.

[*SooZy*]

"hotep" > wrote in message
...
> In alt.pets.cats Ivor Jones > wrote:
>
> : I still and will always maintain a cat should be allowed to do as it
> : pleases, if it wants to go out, it should be allowed to. If you don't
want
> : it to, or you live in an area where it is *unsafe* for a cat to be
> : outside, you should not have one.
>
>
>
> If a cat always did what it pleased, it sure would never be neutered.
>
> Aren't there several breeds that are domesticated to the point that
> they can't/won't defend themselves from other cats outside?
>

yes like the Ragdoll....

I used to let my old cat out as we lived away from busy roads, he used the
dog flap so the cat and dogs could come in and out of the garden as they
pleased 24/7, I had to move (personal reasons) and where I am now (no
garden), no way could I let a cat out, but rather than keeping him in which
I feel would be cruel to him, as he was used to being able to come and go as
he pleased, I gave him to a close friend. He settled into her place just
fine.

[*SooZy*]

"Tracy" > wrote in message
om...
> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>
> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
> ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

[*SooZy*]

"Tracy" > wrote in message
om...
> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>
> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
> ever, ever.

my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world really
though if given the chance to go out.

My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a busy
road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
live indoors.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:42:49 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> wrote:

>
>"hotep" > wrote in message
...
>> In alt.pets.cats Ivor Jones > wrote:
>>
>> : I still and will always maintain a cat should be allowed to do as it
>> : pleases, if it wants to go out, it should be allowed to. If you don't
>want
>> : it to, or you live in an area where it is *unsafe* for a cat to be
>> : outside, you should not have one.
>>
>>
>>
>> If a cat always did what it pleased, it sure would never be neutered.
>>
>> Aren't there several breeds that are domesticated to the point that
>> they can't/won't defend themselves from other cats outside?
>>
>
>yes like the Ragdoll....
>
>I used to let my old cat out as we lived away from busy roads, he used the
>dog flap so the cat and dogs could come in and out of the garden as they
>pleased 24/7, I had to move (personal reasons) and where I am now (no
>garden), no way could I let a cat out, but rather than keeping him in which
>I feel would be cruel to him, as he was used to being able to come and go as
>he pleased, I gave him to a close friend. He settled into her place just
>fine.
>
>
>
You are a genuine cat lover :)

--
Bob.

Cat's motto: No matter what you've done wrong, always try to make it
look like the dog did it.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:42:49 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> wrote:

>
>"hotep" > wrote in message
...
>> In alt.pets.cats Ivor Jones > wrote:
>>
>> : I still and will always maintain a cat should be allowed to do as it
>> : pleases, if it wants to go out, it should be allowed to. If you don't
>want
>> : it to, or you live in an area where it is *unsafe* for a cat to be
>> : outside, you should not have one.
>>
>>
>>
>> If a cat always did what it pleased, it sure would never be neutered.
>>
>> Aren't there several breeds that are domesticated to the point that
>> they can't/won't defend themselves from other cats outside?
>>
>
>yes like the Ragdoll....
>
>I used to let my old cat out as we lived away from busy roads, he used the
>dog flap so the cat and dogs could come in and out of the garden as they
>pleased 24/7, I had to move (personal reasons) and where I am now (no
>garden), no way could I let a cat out, but rather than keeping him in which
>I feel would be cruel to him, as he was used to being able to come and go as
>he pleased, I gave him to a close friend. He settled into her place just
>fine.
>
>
>
You are a genuine cat lover :)

--
Bob.

Cat's motto: No matter what you've done wrong, always try to make it
look like the dog did it.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> wrote:

>
>"Tracy" > wrote in message
om...
>> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
>> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
>> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
>> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
>> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
>> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>>
>> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
>> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
>> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
>> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
>> ever, ever.
>
>my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
>treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
>never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
>very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world really
>though if given the chance to go out.
>
>My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a busy
>road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
>live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

--
Bob.

Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> wrote:

>
>"Tracy" > wrote in message
om...
>> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
>> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
>> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
>> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
>> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
>> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>>
>> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
>> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
>> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
>> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
>> ever, ever.
>
>my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
>treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
>never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
>very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world really
>though if given the chance to go out.
>
>My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a busy
>road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
>live indoors.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.

It really is as simple as that.

--
Bob.

Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

[Rebecca & Terry Jernigan]

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
> om...
> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
> >>
> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
> >> ever, ever.
> >
> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
> >though if given the chance to go out.
> >
> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
> >live indoors.
>
> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
>
> It really is as simple as that.
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

[Rebecca & Terry Jernigan]

Bob,

What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we have
had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
sakes. Thanks, Bob.

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
> om...
> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
> >>
> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
> >> ever, ever.
> >
> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
really
> >though if given the chance to go out.
> >
> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
busy
> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
> >live indoors.
>
> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
>
> It really is as simple as that.
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> Cats know what we feel. They don't always care, but they know.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
> wrote:

>"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
>> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
>> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
>> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
>> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
>> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>> >>
>> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
>> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
>> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
>> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
>> >> ever, ever.
>> >
>> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
>> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
>> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
>> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
>really
>> >though if given the chance to go out.
>> >
>> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
>busy
>> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
>> >live indoors.
>>
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
>>
>> It really is as simple as that.
>>
Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
the same mistake again.

>Bob,
>
>What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
>blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
>And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
>experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
>when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
>them. (Should I have left them out there?)

If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
didn't you?

Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
choice.

Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.

> They all stay in 24/7. The
>youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
>happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
>sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.

What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
Space Station.

> But we have
>had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
>brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
>in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
>mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
>safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
>keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
>don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
>person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
>sakes. Thanks, Bob.

The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.

The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
outside.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.
>
>Bec
>

--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
> wrote:

>"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
>> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
>> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in an
>> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
>> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
>> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>> >>
>> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
>> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
>> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not joyfully
>> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
>> >> ever, ever.
>> >
>> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw meat
>> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and have
>> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't got
>> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
>really
>> >though if given the chance to go out.
>> >
>> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
>busy
>> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy to
>> >live indoors.
>>
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
>>
>> It really is as simple as that.
>>
Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
the same mistake again.

>Bob,
>
>What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is not!"...
>blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
>And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
>experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
>when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
>them. (Should I have left them out there?)

If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
didn't you?

Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
choice.

Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.

> They all stay in 24/7. The
>youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
>happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
>sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.

What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
Space Station.

> But we have
>had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
>brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other strays
>in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
>mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's so
>safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
>keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
>don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
>person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all our
>sakes. Thanks, Bob.

The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.

The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
outside.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.
>
>Bec
>

--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[kilikini]

People, mellow out! If a cat is loved, has a lap to crawl into, if it
purrs, it's happy! Who cares about the rest?

kilikini

[kilikini]

People, mellow out! If a cat is loved, has a lap to crawl into, if it
purrs, it's happy! Who cares about the rest?

kilikini

[Chester]

"Rebecca & Terry Jernigan" > wrote in message
...
> Bob,
>
> What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
> blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
> And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
> experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
> when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
> them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
> youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
> happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
> sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we
have
> had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
> brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
> in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
> mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
> safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
> keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
> don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
> person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
> sakes. Thanks, Bob.
>
> Bec

<SNIP>

Bec,

I know I am stating the obvious but Bob never provides links or any
searchable references to any of his "facts." He will occasionally say "for
more information follow this link" but the link will be to one of his own
previous posts which doesn't have any back-up other than a vague mention to
"UK's major shelters, nor most of the smaller ones that for various reasons
affiliate with the big boys." This is what trolls do. They make statements
repeatedly which inflame and will never provide any facts. If they had
enough facts to prove they are right then the argument would die. Trolls
only post enough to keep arguments alive.

When over his head he will accuse his challengers of "moronic posting style"
or simply say, "abuse report filed." When bored, he will occasionally act
like a net nanny. He will respond to someone's post with; "abuse report
filed" without stating why or to whom it was filed. This is a flame to
cause people to react and start a flurry of postings. If he actually made
as many abuse reports as he suggests, the ISP's would have cut him off for
e-mail flooding. They probably have killfiled him. Which is what I should
have done a long time ago but I find him so darn laughable.

Instead of killfiling him, I have his posts highlighted. I am always
interested to study trolls in their natural environment.

For more information on trolls, net nannies, etc. follow this link. Not my
web site but darn funny.
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html


P.S.
I remembered after writing this that Bob does provide one link to a
netiquette site.

--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

[Chester]

"Rebecca & Terry Jernigan" > wrote in message
...
> Bob,
>
> What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
> blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the outdoors.
> And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants to
> experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
> when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
> them. (Should I have left them out there?) They all stay in 24/7. The
> youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They are
> happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
> sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now. But we
have
> had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
> brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
> in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
> mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
> safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
> keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
> don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
> person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
> sakes. Thanks, Bob.
>
> Bec

<SNIP>

Bec,

I know I am stating the obvious but Bob never provides links or any
searchable references to any of his "facts." He will occasionally say "for
more information follow this link" but the link will be to one of his own
previous posts which doesn't have any back-up other than a vague mention to
"UK's major shelters, nor most of the smaller ones that for various reasons
affiliate with the big boys." This is what trolls do. They make statements
repeatedly which inflame and will never provide any facts. If they had
enough facts to prove they are right then the argument would die. Trolls
only post enough to keep arguments alive.

When over his head he will accuse his challengers of "moronic posting style"
or simply say, "abuse report filed." When bored, he will occasionally act
like a net nanny. He will respond to someone's post with; "abuse report
filed" without stating why or to whom it was filed. This is a flame to
cause people to react and start a flurry of postings. If he actually made
as many abuse reports as he suggests, the ISP's would have cut him off for
e-mail flooding. They probably have killfiled him. Which is what I should
have done a long time ago but I find him so darn laughable.

Instead of killfiling him, I have his posts highlighted. I am always
interested to study trolls in their natural environment.

For more information on trolls, net nannies, etc. follow this link. Not my
web site but darn funny.
http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html


P.S.
I remembered after writing this that Bob does provide one link to a
netiquette site.

--
Chester
http://chester_vaughn.tripod.com/

My psychiatrist said. . .
"Positive results within a year, or your mania back."

[Rebecca & Terry Jernigan]

Oh Dear Bob - You still haven't given me anything to back up your facts
except your own words. Even if I were to believe you, it's very sad that you
consider your house a prison, I don't consider mine one. My cats are
perfectly happy. And I can tell the difference. The rules may be different
in the UK (although I find that hard to believe) but in the US all the SPCAs
and private rescue agencies have policies requesting you raise your cats
indoors ONLY. I didn't realize they were all animal abusers too. Imagine my
surprise when I found out. They site all the reasons that have so patiently
been explained to you by so many people. You know, those silly life
expectancy theories, illness, starvation, fighting, hit by cars, etc... Have
you ever wondered why so many people are for keeping them indoors and so few
for outdoors? Could it be there are more humane people out there than not?
Or ones who know better than you? I know you'll find that hard to believe,
but consider the possibility, please. I don't like to be so snotty with
people, but I don't usually get as angry as you make me. Most people will
listen to another's point of view in a reasonable manner, and then respond
appropriately. But you just simply tell everyone they are out and out wrong,
couldn't possibly be right, and in the nastiest of ways. You'll certainly
never persuade anyone with your technique even if your argument did have any
redeeming qualities. Just keep calling people names, I'm sure we'll all come
to love and respect your point of view that way. And that's the important
thing, isn't it Bob?

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
> >> om...
> >> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
> >> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
> >> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in
an
> >> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
> >> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
> >> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
> >> >>
> >> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
> >> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
> >> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not
joyfully
> >> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
> >> >> ever, ever.
> >> >
> >> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw
meat
> >> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and
have
> >> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't
got
> >> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
> >really
> >> >though if given the chance to go out.
> >> >
> >> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
> >busy
> >> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy
to
> >> >live indoors.
> >>
> >> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> >> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> >> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
> >>
> >> It really is as simple as that.
> >>
> Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
> service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
> the same mistake again.
>
> >Bob,
> >
> >What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
> >blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the
outdoors.
> >And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants
to
> >experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
> >when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
> >them. (Should I have left them out there?)
>
> If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
> yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
> facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
> rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
> didn't you?
>
> Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
> natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
> that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
> it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
> choice.
>
> Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
> their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
> build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
> and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.
>
> > They all stay in 24/7. The
> >youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They
are
> >happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
> >sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.
>
> What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
> everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
> Space Station.
>
> > But we have
> >had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
> >brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
> >in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
> >mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
> >safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
> >keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
> >don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
> >person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
> >sakes. Thanks, Bob.
>
> The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
> smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
> will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
> has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
> grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>
> The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
> outside.
>
> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
> cruel, selfish, or both.
> >
> >Bec
> >
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
> Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[Rebecca & Terry Jernigan]

Oh Dear Bob - You still haven't given me anything to back up your facts
except your own words. Even if I were to believe you, it's very sad that you
consider your house a prison, I don't consider mine one. My cats are
perfectly happy. And I can tell the difference. The rules may be different
in the UK (although I find that hard to believe) but in the US all the SPCAs
and private rescue agencies have policies requesting you raise your cats
indoors ONLY. I didn't realize they were all animal abusers too. Imagine my
surprise when I found out. They site all the reasons that have so patiently
been explained to you by so many people. You know, those silly life
expectancy theories, illness, starvation, fighting, hit by cars, etc... Have
you ever wondered why so many people are for keeping them indoors and so few
for outdoors? Could it be there are more humane people out there than not?
Or ones who know better than you? I know you'll find that hard to believe,
but consider the possibility, please. I don't like to be so snotty with
people, but I don't usually get as angry as you make me. Most people will
listen to another's point of view in a reasonable manner, and then respond
appropriately. But you just simply tell everyone they are out and out wrong,
couldn't possibly be right, and in the nastiest of ways. You'll certainly
never persuade anyone with your technique even if your argument did have any
redeeming qualities. Just keep calling people names, I'm sure we'll all come
to love and respect your point of view that way. And that's the important
thing, isn't it Bob?

Bec

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
> >> om...
> >> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
> >> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
> >> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in
an
> >> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
> >> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
> >> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
> >> >>
> >> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
> >> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
> >> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not
joyfully
> >> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
> >> >> ever, ever.
> >> >
> >> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw
meat
> >> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and
have
> >> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't
got
> >> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
> >really
> >> >though if given the chance to go out.
> >> >
> >> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
> >busy
> >> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy
to
> >> >live indoors.
> >>
> >> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> >> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> >> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
> >>
> >> It really is as simple as that.
> >>
> Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
> service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
> the same mistake again.
>
> >Bob,
> >
> >What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
not!"...
> >blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the
outdoors.
> >And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants
to
> >experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
> >when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
> >them. (Should I have left them out there?)
>
> If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
> yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
> facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
> rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
> didn't you?
>
> Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
> natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
> that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
> it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
> choice.
>
> Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
> their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
> build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
> and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.
>
> > They all stay in 24/7. The
> >youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They
are
> >happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
> >sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.
>
> What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
> everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
> Space Station.
>
> > But we have
> >had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
> >brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
strays
> >in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
> >mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
so
> >safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
> >keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
> >don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
> >person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
our
> >sakes. Thanks, Bob.
>
> The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
> smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
> will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
> has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
> grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>
> The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
> outside.
>
> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
> cruel, selfish, or both.
> >
> >Bec
> >
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
> Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[kilikini]

I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I just
moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats the
freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My cats
used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old. For
never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
that's another story. <g>

kilikini

[kilikini]

I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I just
moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats the
freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My cats
used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old. For
never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
that's another story. <g>

kilikini

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 21:23:42 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:56:59 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>
>>The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
>>smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
>>will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
>>has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
>>grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>>
>
>Wrong!
>
>Where's your source for this information. "Facts" need to be backed up
>with SOURCES.
>
>FYI I have had 3 perfectly healthy cats rehomed to indoor only
>environments from Battersea Dogs Home.

Liar!

Having myself volunteered at Battersea in the past I can state quite
categorically that Battersea DO NOT rehome healthy cats to an indoor
only situation.
>
>>The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
>>outside.
>>
>
>Wrong!

You are - but you don't have to invent lies to try and back it up.

--
Bob.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 21:23:42 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 15:56:59 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>
>>The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
>>smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
>>will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
>>has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
>>grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>>
>
>Wrong!
>
>Where's your source for this information. "Facts" need to be backed up
>with SOURCES.
>
>FYI I have had 3 perfectly healthy cats rehomed to indoor only
>environments from Battersea Dogs Home.

Liar!

Having myself volunteered at Battersea in the past I can state quite
categorically that Battersea DO NOT rehome healthy cats to an indoor
only situation.
>
>>The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
>>outside.
>>
>
>Wrong!

You are - but you don't have to invent lies to try and back it up.

--
Bob.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:44:50 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
> wrote:


>"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
>> >> om...
>> >> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
>> >> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
>> >> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in
>an
>> >> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
>> >> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
>> >> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
>> >> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
>> >> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not
>joyfully
>> >> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
>> >> >> ever, ever.
>> >> >
>> >> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw
>meat
>> >> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and
>have
>> >> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't
>got
>> >> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
>> >really
>> >> >though if given the chance to go out.
>> >> >
>> >> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
>> >busy
>> >> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy
>to
>> >> >live indoors.
>> >>
>> >> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> >> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> >> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
>> >>
>> >> It really is as simple as that.
>> >>
>> Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
>> service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
>> the same mistake again.
>>
>> >Bob,
>> >
>> >What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
>not!"...
>> >blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the
>outdoors.
>> >And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants
>to
>> >experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
>> >when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
>> >them. (Should I have left them out there?)
>>
>> If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
>> yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
>> facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
>> rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
>> didn't you?
>>
>> Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
>> natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
>> that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
>> it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
>> choice.
>>
>> Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
>> their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
>> build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
>> and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.
>>
>> > They all stay in 24/7. The
>> >youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They
>are
>> >happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
>> >sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.
>>
>> What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
>> everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
>> Space Station.
>>
>> > But we have
>> >had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
>> >brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
>strays
>> >in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
>> >mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
>so
>> >safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
>> >keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
>> >don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
>> >person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
>our
>> >sakes. Thanks, Bob.
>>
>> The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
>> smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
>> will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
>> has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
>> grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>>
>> The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
>> outside.
>>
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
>> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
>> cruel, selfish, or both.
>> >
>> >Bec
>> >
>>


Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.

>Oh Dear Bob - You still haven't given me anything to back up your facts
>except your own words. Even if I were to believe you, it's very sad that you
>consider your house a prison, I don't consider mine one.

It is if your cats are not allowed out for at least some time during
the day.

> My cats are
>perfectly happy.

Sadly, many animal abusers delude themselves as you do.

>And I can tell the difference. The rules may be different
>in the UK (although I find that hard to believe) but in the US all the SPCAs
>and private rescue agencies have policies requesting you raise your cats
>indoors ONLY.

The cats are the same - it is just the degree of compassion for
animals that is different in the UK - here we love out animals.

>I didn't realize they were all animal abusers too. Imagine my
>surprise when I found out. They site all the reasons that have so patiently
>been explained to you by so many people. You know, those silly life
>expectancy theories,

Which are silly - indoor only cats do not live longer that
indoor/outdoor cats.

> illness,

Actually more of a problem to indoor only cats who do not have a
properly developed immune system.

>starvation,

Don't you feed your cats?

>fighting,

Not a real problem.

>hit by cars,

Does happen, but rare. It has now been about 4 years since the last
cat was killed in our neighbourhood by a car.

> etc... Have
>you ever wondered why so many people are for keeping them indoors and so few
>for outdoors?

No - because it is only in the USA that this practice is widespread -
the rest of the world looks on in horror at the way you ill-treat your
cats.

Even then, the best estimate is that more than 60% of US cats go out.
Low, compared to the 85% of UK cats, but it is still a majority.

> Could it be there are more humane people out there than not?

No, because even animal abusers like you are still in the minority.

>Or ones who know better than you?

I side with the experts.

>I know you'll find that hard to believe,
>but consider the possibility, please. I don't like to be so snotty with
>people, but I don't usually get as angry as you make me.

It is often true that people get angry when first forced to confront
their abuse of animals.

> Most people will
>listen to another's point of view in a reasonable manner, and then respond
>appropriately.

Most people don't stand by and allow animals to suffer.

>But you just simply tell everyone they are out and out wrong,

Yep - because they are.

>couldn't possibly be right, and in the nastiest of ways. You'll certainly
>never persuade anyone with your technique even if your argument did have any
>redeeming qualities. Just keep calling people names, I'm sure we'll all come
>to love and respect your point of view that way. And that's the important
>thing, isn't it Bob?

You have the facts. Learn from them, or continue to be an animal
abuser.
>
>Bec
>
--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 03:44:50 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
> wrote:


>"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 3 Feb 2004 03:35:42 -0500, "Rebecca & Terry Jernigan"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 17:48:55 +0000 (UTC), "*SooZy*"
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Tracy" > wrote in message
>> >> om...
>> >> >> Jellico is totally correct. The ideal life for a cat, if it can be
>> >> >> managed, is an indoor-outdoor life. Given the cat overpopulation
>> >> >> problem. I would not go so far as to suggest that anyone who is in
>an
>> >> >> urban environment shouldn't have a cat - a safe and loving home is
>> >> >> always better than no home at all, but I, at least, would express
>> >> >> regret if I were forced to keep my cats indoors 24/7.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I have seen cats wary about going through doors to the outside when
>> >> >> they are concerned whether or not the door will remain open for them
>> >> >> to return. I have never seen a cat in my life that would not
>joyfully
>> >> >> bound into a yard when it is no longer worried about that. Never,
>> >> >> ever, ever.
>> >> >
>> >> >my 3 cats are indoor only cats, they have plenty of attention, raw
>meat
>> >> >treats, toys, cat towers, play room etc they were bred indoors and
>have
>> >> >never been out apart from in a carrier visiting/vet. Ragdoll haven't
>got
>> >> >very good self defence, but I bet they would love the outside world
>> >really
>> >> >though if given the chance to go out.
>> >> >
>> >> >My reasons for keeping them in, is because I have no garden, live on a
>> >busy
>> >> >road, they would get stolen. I chose Ragdolls because they seem happy
>to
>> >> >live indoors.
>> >>
>> >> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> >> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> >> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat.
>> >>
>> >> It really is as simple as that.
>> >>
>> Moronic posting style corrected. You have not been charged for this
>> service but I reserve the right to charge in the future if you make
>> the same mistake again.
>>
>> >Bob,
>> >
>> >What a spectacle! You remind me of a 6 year old boy, "Is to!", "Is
>not!"...
>> >blah, blah, blah. I have 12 cats. All have been rescued from the
>outdoors.
>> >And all are extremely thankful for it. Their isn't 1 of them that wants
>to
>> >experience that again. They were miserable, sick, starving, and beaten up
>> >when I found them. And believe me they wouldn't have lived long. Any of
>> >them. (Should I have left them out there?)
>>
>> If the choice was that - or the rest of their lives in prison, then
>> yes, you should have left them. However, must as you may dislike
>> facing facts, that was NOT the only choice. You have the choice to
>> rescue them and then find them proper indoor/outdoor homes - why
>> didn't you?
>>
>> Of course a rescued cat has to spend some time cut off from its
>> natural style of life, but rescue centers do what they can to keep
>> that to a minimum. Running such a rescue operation is hard work, and
>> it is often sad to see the cats go, but for them it is the best
>> choice.
>>
>> Part of what I do now is to take in rescues that have been deprived of
>> their right to roam, it can take a lot of time working with then to
>> build their confidence back up - but the reward of seeing them running
>> and climbing outside makes the hard work worth it.
>>
>> > They all stay in 24/7. The
>> >youngest one who died of an illness was 18 and the oldest was 21. They
>are
>> >happy, fed, warm, exercised - I play with them every day - cuddled, and
>> >sleep with us. I'm allergic to fleas, and we don't have any now.
>>
>> What you mean is you don't have many. Fleas exist just about
>> everywhere man and animals exist - except maybe the International
>> Space Station.
>>
>> > But we have
>> >had, from the cats when they were first brought into the house. One we
>> >brought in had FeV and had to be euthanized, who knows how many other
>strays
>> >in the neighborhood he'd infected before then. When you're running your
>> >mouth about not having a cat unless you can let it outside, and how it's
>so
>> >safe for them - that it's "A FACT", please show me the facts. Don't just
>> >keep saying it's a fact. Show where you got that information. Because I
>> >don't believe a word you say. Nor does any other reasonably intelligent
>> >person reading your postings. So please just put up or shut up, for all
>our
>> >sakes. Thanks, Bob.
>>
>> The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
>> smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
>> will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
>> has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
>> grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>>
>> The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
>> outside.
>>
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
>> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
>> cruel, selfish, or both.
>> >
>> >Bec
>> >
>>


Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.

>Oh Dear Bob - You still haven't given me anything to back up your facts
>except your own words. Even if I were to believe you, it's very sad that you
>consider your house a prison, I don't consider mine one.

It is if your cats are not allowed out for at least some time during
the day.

> My cats are
>perfectly happy.

Sadly, many animal abusers delude themselves as you do.

>And I can tell the difference. The rules may be different
>in the UK (although I find that hard to believe) but in the US all the SPCAs
>and private rescue agencies have policies requesting you raise your cats
>indoors ONLY.

The cats are the same - it is just the degree of compassion for
animals that is different in the UK - here we love out animals.

>I didn't realize they were all animal abusers too. Imagine my
>surprise when I found out. They site all the reasons that have so patiently
>been explained to you by so many people. You know, those silly life
>expectancy theories,

Which are silly - indoor only cats do not live longer that
indoor/outdoor cats.

> illness,

Actually more of a problem to indoor only cats who do not have a
properly developed immune system.

>starvation,

Don't you feed your cats?

>fighting,

Not a real problem.

>hit by cars,

Does happen, but rare. It has now been about 4 years since the last
cat was killed in our neighbourhood by a car.

> etc... Have
>you ever wondered why so many people are for keeping them indoors and so few
>for outdoors?

No - because it is only in the USA that this practice is widespread -
the rest of the world looks on in horror at the way you ill-treat your
cats.

Even then, the best estimate is that more than 60% of US cats go out.
Low, compared to the 85% of UK cats, but it is still a majority.

> Could it be there are more humane people out there than not?

No, because even animal abusers like you are still in the minority.

>Or ones who know better than you?

I side with the experts.

>I know you'll find that hard to believe,
>but consider the possibility, please. I don't like to be so snotty with
>people, but I don't usually get as angry as you make me.

It is often true that people get angry when first forced to confront
their abuse of animals.

> Most people will
>listen to another's point of view in a reasonable manner, and then respond
>appropriately.

Most people don't stand by and allow animals to suffer.

>But you just simply tell everyone they are out and out wrong,

Yep - because they are.

>couldn't possibly be right, and in the nastiest of ways. You'll certainly
>never persuade anyone with your technique even if your argument did have any
>redeeming qualities. Just keep calling people names, I'm sure we'll all come
>to love and respect your point of view that way. And that's the important
>thing, isn't it Bob?

You have the facts. Learn from them, or continue to be an animal
abuser.
>
>Bec
>
--
Bob.

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, "Let there be
Light." And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:28:43 GMT, "kilikini"
> wrote:

>I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
>live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I just
>moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats the
>freedeom to go in and out.

You should have thought of that BEFORE moving.

> Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
>is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!

Sadly, animal abusers often delude themselves that way.

> My cats
>used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old. For
>never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
>attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
>better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
>more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
>that's another story. <g>
>
>kilikini
>

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:28:43 GMT, "kilikini"
> wrote:

>I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
>live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I just
>moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats the
>freedeom to go in and out.

You should have thought of that BEFORE moving.

> Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
>is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!

Sadly, animal abusers often delude themselves that way.

> My cats
>used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old. For
>never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
>attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
>better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
>more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
>that's another story. <g>
>
>kilikini
>

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[kilikini]

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:28:43 GMT, "kilikini"
> > wrote:
>
> >I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
> >live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
just
> >moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
the
> >freedeom to go in and out.
>
> You should have thought of that BEFORE moving.
>
> > Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
> >is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!
>
> Sadly, animal abusers often delude themselves that way.
>
> > My cats
> >used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
For
> >never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
> >attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
> >better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
> >more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
> >that's another story. <g>
> >
> >kilikini
> >
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
> we hear you talk.

I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her house
back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on Maui.
My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a month. I
now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month. What
to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad with
your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've gone
without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were fed.
Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
consider possibilities. Jeez!

kilikini

[kilikini]

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:28:43 GMT, "kilikini"
> > wrote:
>
> >I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
> >live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
just
> >moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
the
> >freedeom to go in and out.
>
> You should have thought of that BEFORE moving.
>
> > Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
> >is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!
>
> Sadly, animal abusers often delude themselves that way.
>
> > My cats
> >used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
For
> >never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
> >attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
> >better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
> >more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
> >that's another story. <g>
> >
> >kilikini
> >
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
> we hear you talk.

I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her house
back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on Maui.
My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a month. I
now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month. What
to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad with
your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've gone
without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were fed.
Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
consider possibilities. Jeez!

kilikini

[~*Connie*~]

you really should ignore the trolls.. You don't abuse your animals by
keeping them inside.. your doing them a huge favor. Indoor cats are happy
well cared for cats.

> I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her
house
> back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on Maui.
> My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a month.
I
> now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month.
What
> to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad
with
> your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've gone
> without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were fed.
> Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
> consider possibilities. Jeez!
>
> kilikini
>
>
>

[~*Connie*~]

you really should ignore the trolls.. You don't abuse your animals by
keeping them inside.. your doing them a huge favor. Indoor cats are happy
well cared for cats.

> I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her
house
> back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on Maui.
> My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a month.
I
> now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month.
What
> to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad
with
> your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've gone
> without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were fed.
> Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
> consider possibilities. Jeez!
>
> kilikini
>
>
>

[kilikini]

"~*Connie*~" > wrote in message
...
> you really should ignore the trolls.. You don't abuse your animals by
> keeping them inside.. your doing them a huge favor. Indoor cats are happy
> well cared for cats.
>
> > I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her
> house
> > back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on
Maui.
> > My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a
month.
> I
> > now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month.
> What
> > to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad
> with
> > your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've
gone
> > without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were
fed.
> > Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
> > consider possibilities. Jeez!
> >
> > kilikini
> >
> >


Connie, you're right, I know, but man! Who is this person? WTF? (Excuse
my language) I have gone to such lengths to make sure that I can find a
place to live that allows me to have my animals. I am NOT an abusive or
irresponsible pet owner by any means. If I had the money, I'd buy acres and
acres and set up a refuge. The reason why I'm so hostile is because I
*just* went thru the move and it was hell to find a place. It really was!
So now I'm completely broke, but as long as we (dog and 2 cats) are
together, I'm happy.

kilikini

[kilikini]

"~*Connie*~" > wrote in message
...
> you really should ignore the trolls.. You don't abuse your animals by
> keeping them inside.. your doing them a huge favor. Indoor cats are happy
> well cared for cats.
>
> > I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her
> house
> > back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on
Maui.
> > My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a
month.
> I
> > now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month.
> What
> > to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad
> with
> > your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've
gone
> > without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were
fed.
> > Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
> > consider possibilities. Jeez!
> >
> > kilikini
> >
> >


Connie, you're right, I know, but man! Who is this person? WTF? (Excuse
my language) I have gone to such lengths to make sure that I can find a
place to live that allows me to have my animals. I am NOT an abusive or
irresponsible pet owner by any means. If I had the money, I'd buy acres and
acres and set up a refuge. The reason why I'm so hostile is because I
*just* went thru the move and it was hell to find a place. It really was!
So now I'm completely broke, but as long as we (dog and 2 cats) are
together, I'm happy.

kilikini

[Starlord]

Guess why I don't see his postings? He's joined the other dipsticks in my
killfile. I live in the High Mojave Desert, and an outdoor cat in this area
becomes the low end of the food chain real fast. None of my cats go outside, not
only the mix breeds I've saved, but also my Show cats ( Japanese Bobtails ) and
they all live inside and enjoy it too.


--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
World of Dahlias Slideshowv1.0 $10.00
for Windows machines. Email:



"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
>
> "~*Connie*~" > wrote in message
> ...
> > you really should ignore the trolls.. You don't abuse your animals by
> > keeping them inside.. your doing them a huge favor. Indoor cats are happy
> > well cared for cats.
> >
> > > I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her
> > house
> > > back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on
> Maui.
> > > My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a
> month.
> > I
> > > now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month.
> > What
> > > to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad
> > with
> > > your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've
> gone
> > > without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were
> fed.
> > > Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
> > > consider possibilities. Jeez!
> > >
> > > kilikini
> > >
> > >
>
>
> Connie, you're right, I know, but man! Who is this person? WTF? (Excuse
> my language) I have gone to such lengths to make sure that I can find a
> place to live that allows me to have my animals. I am NOT an abusive or
> irresponsible pet owner by any means. If I had the money, I'd buy acres and
> acres and set up a refuge. The reason why I'm so hostile is because I
> *just* went thru the move and it was hell to find a place. It really was!
> So now I'm completely broke, but as long as we (dog and 2 cats) are
> together, I'm happy.
>
> kilikini
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.577 / Virus Database: 366 - Release Date: 2/3/04

[Starlord]

Guess why I don't see his postings? He's joined the other dipsticks in my
killfile. I live in the High Mojave Desert, and an outdoor cat in this area
becomes the low end of the food chain real fast. None of my cats go outside, not
only the mix breeds I've saved, but also my Show cats ( Japanese Bobtails ) and
they all live inside and enjoy it too.


--
"In this universe the night was falling,the shadows were lengthening
towards an east that would not know another dawn.
But elsewhere the stars were still young and the light of morning
lingered: and along the path he once had followed, man would one day go
again."

Arthur C. Clarke, The City & The Stars

SIAR
www.starlords.org
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
World of Dahlias Slideshowv1.0 $10.00
for Windows machines. Email:



"kilikini" > wrote in message
...
>
> "~*Connie*~" > wrote in message
> ...
> > you really should ignore the trolls.. You don't abuse your animals by
> > keeping them inside.. your doing them a huge favor. Indoor cats are happy
> > well cared for cats.
> >
> > > I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent. The landlady wanted her
> > house
> > > back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on
> Maui.
> > > My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a
> month.
> > I
> > > now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month.
> > What
> > > to do - get rid of my girls? I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad
> > with
> > > your statements. ABUSE my animals? There have been times when I've
> gone
> > > without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were
> fed.
> > > Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
> > > consider possibilities. Jeez!
> > >
> > > kilikini
> > >
> > >
>
>
> Connie, you're right, I know, but man! Who is this person? WTF? (Excuse
> my language) I have gone to such lengths to make sure that I can find a
> place to live that allows me to have my animals. I am NOT an abusive or
> irresponsible pet owner by any means. If I had the money, I'd buy acres and
> acres and set up a refuge. The reason why I'm so hostile is because I
> *just* went thru the move and it was hell to find a place. It really was!
> So now I'm completely broke, but as long as we (dog and 2 cats) are
> together, I'm happy.
>
> kilikini
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.577 / Virus Database: 366 - Release Date: 2/3/04

[Hans Schrøder]

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>
> The cats are the same - it is just the degree of compassion for
> animals that is different in the UK - here we love out animals.
>

Oh yes, how to love animals is perfectly shown by Queen Elizabeth II. She is
very fond of hunting foxes and other animals and birds living out in the
free. The last thing I saw from Her Majesty was her beating a wounded bird
to death with her walking stick, after which she turned to her company
laughing and smiling. Not to mention the behaviour of the Royal d*gs...

Bob, is there a deep pond near by where you live? Go out there, it needs
your company...

Hans

[Hans Schrøder]

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>
> The cats are the same - it is just the degree of compassion for
> animals that is different in the UK - here we love out animals.
>

Oh yes, how to love animals is perfectly shown by Queen Elizabeth II. She is
very fond of hunting foxes and other animals and birds living out in the
free. The last thing I saw from Her Majesty was her beating a wounded bird
to death with her walking stick, after which she turned to her company
laughing and smiling. Not to mention the behaviour of the Royal d*gs...

Bob, is there a deep pond near by where you live? Go out there, it needs
your company...

Hans

[Lee Waun]

>
> Connie, you're right, I know, but man! Who is this person? WTF? (Excuse
> my language) I have gone to such lengths to make sure that I can find a
> place to live that allows me to have my animals. I am NOT an abusive or
> irresponsible pet owner by any means. If I had the money, I'd buy acres
and
> acres and set up a refuge. The reason why I'm so hostile is because I
> *just* went thru the move and it was hell to find a place. It really was!
> So now I'm completely broke, but as long as we (dog and 2 cats) are
> together, I'm happy.
>
> kilikini
>
>

Bob is the biggest troll in the cat news groups. There is even a faq page on
him. He has even said and you can look it up on google that he has said he
would rather kill all the cats in north america then let them live as
indoor cats.

He is also known to not fix his animals and allows his cats to have unwanted
litters. Just check google and you will see he is not worth replying to.
Just killfile him like most of us have and you will never even miss him.

I have 2 cats both rescue. One a siamese cross and one a Maine Coon and both
are totally indoors. Except the balcony and the Maine Coon has killed 2
squirrels that jumped on to the balcony. So I think the balcony should be
off limits until the squirrels grab a clue.

[Lee Waun]

>
> Connie, you're right, I know, but man! Who is this person? WTF? (Excuse
> my language) I have gone to such lengths to make sure that I can find a
> place to live that allows me to have my animals. I am NOT an abusive or
> irresponsible pet owner by any means. If I had the money, I'd buy acres
and
> acres and set up a refuge. The reason why I'm so hostile is because I
> *just* went thru the move and it was hell to find a place. It really was!
> So now I'm completely broke, but as long as we (dog and 2 cats) are
> together, I'm happy.
>
> kilikini
>
>

Bob is the biggest troll in the cat news groups. There is even a faq page on
him. He has even said and you can look it up on google that he has said he
would rather kill all the cats in north america then let them live as
indoor cats.

He is also known to not fix his animals and allows his cats to have unwanted
litters. Just check google and you will see he is not worth replying to.
Just killfile him like most of us have and you will never even miss him.

I have 2 cats both rescue. One a siamese cross and one a Maine Coon and both
are totally indoors. Except the balcony and the Maine Coon has killed 2
squirrels that jumped on to the balcony. So I think the balcony should be
off limits until the squirrels grab a clue.

[DevilsPGD]

In message >> Bob Brenchley.
> did ramble:

>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.

But yet you don't trim. *sigh* Wow.

[DevilsPGD]

In message >> Bob Brenchley.
> did ramble:

>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.

But yet you don't trim. *sigh* Wow.

[DevilsPGD]

In message >> John Smith
> did ramble:

>If you must insist on taking it upon yourself to be a netcop you could
>at least follow YOUR OWN usenet guidelines and trim out the
>unnecessary quotes and simply reply to the relevant parts.

Damnit, I knew I should have read the thread before pointing out the
lack of trimming. *sigh*

[DevilsPGD]

In message >> John Smith
> did ramble:

>If you must insist on taking it upon yourself to be a netcop you could
>at least follow YOUR OWN usenet guidelines and trim out the
>unnecessary quotes and simply reply to the relevant parts.

Damnit, I knew I should have read the thread before pointing out the
lack of trimming. *sigh*

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:44:05 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:29:35 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
>>>>smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
>>>>will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
>>>>has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
>>>>grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Wrong!
>>>
>>>Where's your source for this information. "Facts" need to be backed up
>>>with SOURCES.
>>>
>>>FYI I have had 3 perfectly healthy cats rehomed to indoor only
>>>environments from Battersea Dogs Home.
>>
>>Liar!
>>
>>Having myself volunteered at Battersea in the past I can state quite
>>categorically that Battersea DO NOT rehome healthy cats to an indoor
>>only situation.
>>>
>
>Well that must have been way back in the past then as I rehomed one as
>early as last November (2003). They had no problem with it at all. I
>have the cats here to prove it!
>
>You may have volunteered there once upon a time, but you clearly have
>no idea what is going on there now as "I can state quite categorically
>that Battersea DO rehome healthy cats to an indoor only situation".
>
>So it appears YOU are the liar.

Hohohoho! Listen bud, when you develop some honesty then please feel
free to return.
>
>>>>The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
>>>>outside.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Wrong!
>>
>>You are - but you don't have to invent lies to try and back it up.
>
>Haha, that's funny coming from you. You have repeatedly been asked to
>provide some kind of proof and/or sources for your "facts" which you
>still have not been able to do.
>
>That would seem to indicate YOU are the liar.

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:44:05 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:29:35 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
>>>>smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
>>>>will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
>>>>has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
>>>>grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Wrong!
>>>
>>>Where's your source for this information. "Facts" need to be backed up
>>>with SOURCES.
>>>
>>>FYI I have had 3 perfectly healthy cats rehomed to indoor only
>>>environments from Battersea Dogs Home.
>>
>>Liar!
>>
>>Having myself volunteered at Battersea in the past I can state quite
>>categorically that Battersea DO NOT rehome healthy cats to an indoor
>>only situation.
>>>
>
>Well that must have been way back in the past then as I rehomed one as
>early as last November (2003). They had no problem with it at all. I
>have the cats here to prove it!
>
>You may have volunteered there once upon a time, but you clearly have
>no idea what is going on there now as "I can state quite categorically
>that Battersea DO rehome healthy cats to an indoor only situation".
>
>So it appears YOU are the liar.

Hohohoho! Listen bud, when you develop some honesty then please feel
free to return.
>
>>>>The facts are that cats show signs of stress when deprived of time
>>>>outside.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Wrong!
>>
>>You are - but you don't have to invent lies to try and back it up.
>
>Haha, that's funny coming from you. You have repeatedly been asked to
>provide some kind of proof and/or sources for your "facts" which you
>still have not been able to do.
>
>That would seem to indicate YOU are the liar.

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:50:31 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:38:02 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>>
>
>If you must insist on taking it upon yourself to be a netcop you could
>at least follow YOUR OWN usenet guidelines and trim out the
>unnecessary quotes and simply reply to the relevant parts.
>
>How can you pull other people up on top posting and then you go and
>quote THE WHOLE of the previous message in YOUR reply?
>
>Not very smart is it?

Yes, actually it is, not that I would expect a dishonest person like
you to understand.

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:50:31 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:38:02 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>>
>
>If you must insist on taking it upon yourself to be a netcop you could
>at least follow YOUR OWN usenet guidelines and trim out the
>unnecessary quotes and simply reply to the relevant parts.
>
>How can you pull other people up on top posting and then you go and
>quote THE WHOLE of the previous message in YOUR reply?
>
>Not very smart is it?

Yes, actually it is, not that I would expect a dishonest person like
you to understand.

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:55:02 GMT, DevilsPGD
> wrote:

>In message >> Bob Brenchley.
> did ramble:
>
>>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
>But yet you don't trim. *sigh* Wow.

Of course not - she didn't.

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 07:55:02 GMT, DevilsPGD
> wrote:

>In message >> Bob Brenchley.
> did ramble:
>
>>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
>But yet you don't trim. *sigh* Wow.

Of course not - she didn't.

--
Bob.

Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
we hear you talk.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 00:11:52 GMT, "kilikini"
> wrote:

>
>"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:28:43 GMT, "kilikini"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
>> >live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
>just
>> >moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
>the
>> >freedeom to go in and out.
>>
>> You should have thought of that BEFORE moving.
>>
>> > Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
>> >is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!
>>
>> Sadly, animal abusers often delude themselves that way.
>>
>> > My cats
>> >used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
>For
>> >never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
>> >attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
>> >better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
>> >more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
>> >that's another story. <g>
>> >
>> >kilikini
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Bob.
>>
>> Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
>> we hear you talk.
>
>I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent.

So do a lot of people - and when they move they find housing suitable
for their pets.

> The landlady wanted her house
>back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on Maui.
>My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a month. I
>now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month. What
>to do - get rid of my girls?

Yes, it is now time either for you to find a proper home for yourself,
or just one for them.

> I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad with
>your statements. ABUSE my animals?

Yes - abuse of animals by not providing them with essential things
they need in their life.

> There have been times when I've gone
>without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were fed.
>Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
>consider possibilities. Jeez!
>
>kilikini
>
>
If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 00:11:52 GMT, "kilikini"
> wrote:

>
>"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 17:28:43 GMT, "kilikini"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
>> >live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
>just
>> >moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
>the
>> >freedeom to go in and out.
>>
>> You should have thought of that BEFORE moving.
>>
>> > Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
>> >is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!
>>
>> Sadly, animal abusers often delude themselves that way.
>>
>> > My cats
>> >used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
>For
>> >never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
>> >attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
>> >better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
>> >more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
>> >that's another story. <g>
>> >
>> >kilikini
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Bob.
>>
>> Light travels faster than sound. This is why you appear bright until
>> we hear you talk.
>
>I didn't have a choice in the move. I rent.

So do a lot of people - and when they move they find housing suitable
for their pets.

> The landlady wanted her house
>back. Having said that, it's EXTREMELY difficult to find housing on Maui.
>My old 3 bedroom house with a nice fenced in yard rented at $850 a month. I
>now am forced to live in cramped apartment housing for $1300 a month. What
>to do - get rid of my girls?

Yes, it is now time either for you to find a proper home for yourself,
or just one for them.

> I don't THINK so. Gosh, you made me mad with
>your statements. ABUSE my animals?

Yes - abuse of animals by not providing them with essential things
they need in their life.

> There have been times when I've gone
>without food for a day or two just to make sure that my animals were fed.
>Before you go making foolish and accusatory statements about a person,
>consider possibilities. Jeez!
>
>kilikini
>
>
If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:30:22 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:43:46 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>So it appears YOU are the liar.
>>
>>Hohohoho! Listen bud, when you develop some honesty then please feel
>>free to return.
>>>
>
>Huh? Honesty! I have stated a FACT

No, I stated the fact - you turned up and told a lie.

> to you which you are obviously
>having trouble understanding. It's not my fault if I am proving one of
>your so-called "facts" to be totally wrong.
>
>Whereas I have not seen you provide any proof whatsoever of your
>"facts".

Now do shut up you stupid troll.

--
Bob.

I read your mind, and believe me, it was a short story...

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:30:22 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:43:46 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>So it appears YOU are the liar.
>>
>>Hohohoho! Listen bud, when you develop some honesty then please feel
>>free to return.
>>>
>
>Huh? Honesty! I have stated a FACT

No, I stated the fact - you turned up and told a lie.

> to you which you are obviously
>having trouble understanding. It's not my fault if I am proving one of
>your so-called "facts" to be totally wrong.
>
>Whereas I have not seen you provide any proof whatsoever of your
>"facts".

Now do shut up you stupid troll.

--
Bob.

I read your mind, and believe me, it was a short story...

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:31:39 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:44:59 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes, actually it is, not that I would expect a dishonest person like
>>you to understand.
>
>No Bob, trying to be a netcop when you are guilty of not trimming to
>context is NOT very smart.
>
>Neither are you apparently though so it's to be expected I guess.

Stupid (lying) troll.

** plonk **

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 10:31:39 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 09:44:59 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Yes, actually it is, not that I would expect a dishonest person like
>>you to understand.
>
>No Bob, trying to be a netcop when you are guilty of not trimming to
>context is NOT very smart.
>
>Neither are you apparently though so it's to be expected I guess.

Stupid (lying) troll.

** plonk **

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[DevilsPGD]

In message >> Bob Brenchley.
> did ramble:

>>>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>>>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>>>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>>>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>>
>>But yet you don't trim. *sigh* Wow.
>
>Of course not - she didn't.

"she" top posted. Why didn't you?

[DevilsPGD]

In message >> Bob Brenchley.
> did ramble:

>>>Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
>>>service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
>>>Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
>>>repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>>
>>But yet you don't trim. *sigh* Wow.
>
>Of course not - she didn't.

"she" top posted. Why didn't you?

[Adrian Lane]

John Smith wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:29:35 +0000, in article
> >, Bob Brenchley.
> > wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>>The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
> >>>smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
> >>>will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
> >>>has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
> >>>grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Wrong!
> >>
> >>Where's your source for this information. "Facts" need to be backed up
> >>with SOURCES.
> >>
> >>FYI I have had 3 perfectly healthy cats rehomed to indoor only
> >>environments from Battersea Dogs Home.
> >
> >Liar!
> >
> >Having myself volunteered at Battersea in the past I can state quite
> >categorically that Battersea DO NOT rehome healthy cats to an indoor
> >only situation.
> >>
>
> Well that must have been way back in the past then as I rehomed one as
> early as last November (2003). They had no problem with it at all. I
> have the cats here to prove it!
>
> You may have volunteered there once upon a time, but you clearly have
> no idea what is going on there now as "I can state quite categorically
> that Battersea DO rehome healthy cats to an indoor only situation".
>
> So it appears YOU are the liar.

I assume your cats are not 100% healthy then. Having watched many of the
TV programs centered on Battersea I've seen them state several times
that they don't home healthy cats indoors.



--
Adrian Lane

[Adrian Lane]

John Smith wrote:

> On Wed, 04 Feb 2004 22:29:35 +0000, in article
> >, Bob Brenchley.
> > wrote:
>
> >>>
> >>>The FACT is that none of the UK's major shelters, nor most of the
> >>>smaller ones that for various reasons affiliate with the big boys,
> >>>will normally rehome a healthy cat to an indoor only environment. This
> >>>has been confirmed on numerous occasions by people who work at the
> >>>grass roots level - actually finding homes for cats.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Wrong!
> >>
> >>Where's your source for this information. "Facts" need to be backed up
> >>with SOURCES.
> >>
> >>FYI I have had 3 perfectly healthy cats rehomed to indoor only
> >>environments from Battersea Dogs Home.
> >
> >Liar!
> >
> >Having myself volunteered at Battersea in the past I can state quite
> >categorically that Battersea DO NOT rehome healthy cats to an indoor
> >only situation.
> >>
>
> Well that must have been way back in the past then as I rehomed one as
> early as last November (2003). They had no problem with it at all. I
> have the cats here to prove it!
>
> You may have volunteered there once upon a time, but you clearly have
> no idea what is going on there now as "I can state quite categorically
> that Battersea DO rehome healthy cats to an indoor only situation".
>
> So it appears YOU are the liar.

I assume your cats are not 100% healthy then. Having watched many of the
TV programs centered on Battersea I've seen them state several times
that they don't home healthy cats indoors.



--
Adrian Lane

[lakinapook]

Don't listen to this idiot. You did the right thing, and I have the
greatest admiration for you for not just dumping your cats at the
shelter because it was hard to find a place that would accept them. I
despise people who ditch their pets, pet ownership is a sacred trust,
when you adopt them you are agreeing to care for them for their whole
natural life. It sounds like this guy Bob is the abusive pet owner,
not you. One of my friends had an outdoor cat that disappeared on her
and she was heartbroken. I told her that she would need to keep any
future cats she adopted inside next time, and explained that she
wasn't being cruel in doing so. She sincerely didn't realize that
cats are perfectly content to be indoors, and now she has 4 happy
healthy cats in her house.
> >
> >
> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
> cruel, selfish, or both.

[lakinapook]

Don't listen to this idiot. You did the right thing, and I have the
greatest admiration for you for not just dumping your cats at the
shelter because it was hard to find a place that would accept them. I
despise people who ditch their pets, pet ownership is a sacred trust,
when you adopt them you are agreeing to care for them for their whole
natural life. It sounds like this guy Bob is the abusive pet owner,
not you. One of my friends had an outdoor cat that disappeared on her
and she was heartbroken. I told her that she would need to keep any
future cats she adopted inside next time, and explained that she
wasn't being cruel in doing so. She sincerely didn't realize that
cats are perfectly content to be indoors, and now she has 4 happy
healthy cats in her house.
> >
> >
> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
> cruel, selfish, or both.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:

>Don't listen to this idiot. You did the right thing, and I have the
>greatest admiration for you for not just dumping your cats at the
>shelter because it was hard to find a place that would accept them. I
>despise people who ditch their pets, pet ownership is a sacred trust,
>when you adopt them you are agreeing to care for them for their whole
>natural life. It sounds like this guy Bob is the abusive pet owner,
>not you. One of my friends had an outdoor cat that disappeared on her
>and she was heartbroken. I told her that she would need to keep any
>future cats she adopted inside next time, and explained that she
>wasn't being cruel in doing so. She sincerely didn't realize that
>cats are perfectly content to be indoors, and now she has 4 happy
>healthy cats in her house.
>> >
>> >
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
>> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
>> cruel, selfish, or both.

The idiot is you - and a top-posting one at that, how much lower on
the intelligence scale can you get.

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:

>Don't listen to this idiot. You did the right thing, and I have the
>greatest admiration for you for not just dumping your cats at the
>shelter because it was hard to find a place that would accept them. I
>despise people who ditch their pets, pet ownership is a sacred trust,
>when you adopt them you are agreeing to care for them for their whole
>natural life. It sounds like this guy Bob is the abusive pet owner,
>not you. One of my friends had an outdoor cat that disappeared on her
>and she was heartbroken. I told her that she would need to keep any
>future cats she adopted inside next time, and explained that she
>wasn't being cruel in doing so. She sincerely didn't realize that
>cats are perfectly content to be indoors, and now she has 4 happy
>healthy cats in her house.
>> >
>> >
>> If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
>> allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
>> day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
>> a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
>> cruel, selfish, or both.

The idiot is you - and a top-posting one at that, how much lower on
the intelligence scale can you get.

--
Bob.

The difference between ordinary stupid and extraordinary stupid can be
summed up in one word -- YOU.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:

>Don't listen to this idiot.

This from a top-posting moron.

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson - however, I reserve the
legal right to charge you for future lessons if you fail to take this
opportunity to correct your errant ways.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:

>Don't listen to this idiot.

This from a top-posting moron.

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson - however, I reserve the
legal right to charge you for future lessons if you fail to take this
opportunity to correct your errant ways.

[Tropical Tim]

Hey Kilikini,
What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.

Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.

By the way, what does your name mean?

Tim


"kilikini" > wrote in message >...
> I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
> live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I just
> moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats the
> freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
> is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My cats
> used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old. For
> never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
> attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
> better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
> more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
> that's another story. <g>
>
> kilikini

[Tropical Tim]

Hey Kilikini,
What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.

Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.

By the way, what does your name mean?

Tim


"kilikini" > wrote in message >...
> I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since I
> live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I just
> moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats the
> freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the outside
> is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My cats
> used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old. For
> never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
> attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
> better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
> more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
> that's another story. <g>
>
> kilikini

[kilikini]

Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because the
thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)

Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and are now
even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done before. I think
they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now on. Well, at least one
of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and build
a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My black and
white is just loving being indoors. My only problem with her is that she's
getting extremely interested in what I'm making and eating for dinner! LOL.
And she's loudly announcing her presence as she's waiting for a piece of
food to fall her way. <g> Yesterday I found her observing me from the
kitchen counter (what bit of counterspace I have in this box) and she's
never done that before! Currently, I have each one of my cats on either
side of me as I type - one on the left and one on the right. They always
have to be right by me.

I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley. I don't usually do that. The
point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my house
that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted it back for
her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I made a *lifetime*
decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of them when life becomes
*inconvenient*. It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to do so
for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an apartment setting
and my cats aren't free to go out. I could let them out on the lanai, but
if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down. NO
thank you.

There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society just
recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the caught/dropped off,
unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the new cat house along with
the old house, can only hold so many and at least 20 cats are put down
daily. To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous! They'd most likely
be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than being
inside where they're loved and cared for? Sorry...........I'm getting
worked up again. Jeesh!

I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded person and
I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding my situation.
Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better or worse, they go
with me.

kilikini

P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive term.
Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like Christy.



"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
m...
> Hey Kilikini,
> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
> costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
>
> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
> is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
>
> By the way, what does your name mean?
>
> Tim
>
>
> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>...
> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since
I
> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
just
> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
the
> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the
outside
> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My
cats
> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
For
> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
> > attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
> > better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
> > more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
> > that's another story. <g>
> >
> > kilikini

[kilikini]

Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because the
thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)

Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and are now
even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done before. I think
they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now on. Well, at least one
of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and build
a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My black and
white is just loving being indoors. My only problem with her is that she's
getting extremely interested in what I'm making and eating for dinner! LOL.
And she's loudly announcing her presence as she's waiting for a piece of
food to fall her way. <g> Yesterday I found her observing me from the
kitchen counter (what bit of counterspace I have in this box) and she's
never done that before! Currently, I have each one of my cats on either
side of me as I type - one on the left and one on the right. They always
have to be right by me.

I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley. I don't usually do that. The
point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my house
that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted it back for
her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I made a *lifetime*
decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of them when life becomes
*inconvenient*. It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to do so
for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an apartment setting
and my cats aren't free to go out. I could let them out on the lanai, but
if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down. NO
thank you.

There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society just
recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the caught/dropped off,
unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the new cat house along with
the old house, can only hold so many and at least 20 cats are put down
daily. To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous! They'd most likely
be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than being
inside where they're loved and cared for? Sorry...........I'm getting
worked up again. Jeesh!

I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded person and
I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding my situation.
Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better or worse, they go
with me.

kilikini

P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive term.
Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like Christy.



"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
m...
> Hey Kilikini,
> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
> costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
>
> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
> is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
>
> By the way, what does your name mean?
>
> Tim
>
>
> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>...
> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since
I
> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
just
> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
the
> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the
outside
> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My
cats
> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
For
> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
> > attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
> > better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
> > more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
> > that's another story. <g>
> >
> > kilikini

[Diana]

John Smith at wrote on2/26/04 6:45 AM:

> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:02:07 +0000, in article
> >, Bob Brenchley.
> > wrote:
>
>> On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:
>>
>>> Don't listen to this idiot.
>>
>
> While Googling I came across this very interesting link about "Bob
> Brenchley" which includes a lovely picture of this repulsive idiot.
>
> Seems our resident troll Bob has quite a history of being a moron.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> http://badtux.net/bob-faq.html
>

Well, I don't go along with Brenchley's put-downs of people with whom he
disagrees, and certainly cats should not be given chocolate, and on occasion
he does, IMO, cross the line from strongly opinionated to flamingly fanatic.
But all that said, I kind of hate to see the bad rap about him on Google, as
if all he ever did was troll. I think the guy has a clever sense of humor,
a right to express himself in this forum, and the occasional productive
remarks to contribute. He's been on here forever, and (all of those aliases
aside, not of which I've encountered that I know of) can always be counted
on to be precisely and unashamedly himself. I prefer to think of him not as
a troll, but as a colorful character. But that's just me.
--
Diana

Portal To My Pages
http://bellsouthpwp.net/d/r/drdrive/

[Diana]

John Smith at wrote on2/26/04 6:45 AM:

> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 10:02:07 +0000, in article
> >, Bob Brenchley.
> > wrote:
>
>> On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:
>>
>>> Don't listen to this idiot.
>>
>
> While Googling I came across this very interesting link about "Bob
> Brenchley" which includes a lovely picture of this repulsive idiot.
>
> Seems our resident troll Bob has quite a history of being a moron.
>
> Enjoy!
>
> http://badtux.net/bob-faq.html
>

Well, I don't go along with Brenchley's put-downs of people with whom he
disagrees, and certainly cats should not be given chocolate, and on occasion
he does, IMO, cross the line from strongly opinionated to flamingly fanatic.
But all that said, I kind of hate to see the bad rap about him on Google, as
if all he ever did was troll. I think the guy has a clever sense of humor,
a right to express himself in this forum, and the occasional productive
remarks to contribute. He's been on here forever, and (all of those aliases
aside, not of which I've encountered that I know of) can always be counted
on to be precisely and unashamedly himself. I prefer to think of him not as
a troll, but as a colorful character. But that's just me.
--
Diana

Portal To My Pages
http://bellsouthpwp.net/d/r/drdrive/

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:45:47 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:
>>
>>>Don't listen to this idiot.
>>
>
>While Googling I came across this very interesting link about "Bob
>Brenchley" which includes a lovely picture of this repulsive idiot.

Abuse Report Filed.

--
Bob.

Your stupidity sets new standards - even for Usenet.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:45:47 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>On 24 Feb 2004 21:18:18 -0800, (lakinapook) wrote:
>>
>>>Don't listen to this idiot.
>>
>
>While Googling I came across this very interesting link about "Bob
>Brenchley" which includes a lovely picture of this repulsive idiot.

Abuse Report Filed.

--
Bob.

Your stupidity sets new standards - even for Usenet.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:45:31 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 23:50:24 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>>Don't listen to this idiot.
>
>While Googling I came across this very interesting link about "Bob
>Brenchley" which includes a lovely picture of this repulsive idiot.
>
>Seems our resident troll Bob has quite a history of being a moron.

Abuse Report Filed.

--
Bob.

Your stupidity sets new standards - even for Usenet.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 11:45:31 +0000, John Smith > wrote:

>On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 23:50:24 +0000, in article
>, Bob Brenchley.
> wrote:
>
>>>Don't listen to this idiot.
>
>While Googling I came across this very interesting link about "Bob
>Brenchley" which includes a lovely picture of this repulsive idiot.
>
>Seems our resident troll Bob has quite a history of being a moron.

Abuse Report Filed.

--
Bob.

Your stupidity sets new standards - even for Usenet.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:02:36 GMT, "kilikini"
> wrote:

>"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
m...
>> Hey Kilikini,
>> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
>> costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
>>
>> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
>> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
>> is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
>>
>> By the way, what does your name mean?
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>...
>> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since
>I
>> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
>just
>> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
>the
>> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the
>outside
>> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My
>cats
>> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
>For
>> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
>> > attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
>> > better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
>> > more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
>> > that's another story. <g>
>> >
>> > kilikini
>
Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.


>Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because the
>thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)

You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
>
>Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and are now
>even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done before. I think
>they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now on.

That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.

> Well, at least one
>of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and build
>a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My black and
>white is just loving being indoors.

Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
are.


>
>I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley.

There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.

> I don't usually do that. The
>point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my house
>that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted it back for
>her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I made a *lifetime*
>decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of them when life becomes
>*inconvenient*.

Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
suffering for your cats.

> It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
>would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to do so
>for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an apartment setting
>and my cats aren't free to go out.

Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?

> I could let them out on the lanai, but
>if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down. NO
>thank you.
>
>There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society just
>recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the caught/dropped off,
>unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the new cat house along with
>the old house, can only hold so many and at least 20 cats are put down
>daily.

That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.

And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
indoors only.

>To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
>because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!

Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
get a proper life.

>They'd most likely
>be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than being
>inside where they're loved and cared for?

In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.

>Sorry...........I'm getting
>worked up again. Jeesh!
>
>I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded person and
>I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding my situation.
>Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better or worse, they go
>with me.
>
>kilikini
>
>P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive term.
>Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like Christy.

It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.

--
Bob.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:02:36 GMT, "kilikini"
> wrote:

>"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
m...
>> Hey Kilikini,
>> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
>> costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
>>
>> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
>> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
>> is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
>>
>> By the way, what does your name mean?
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>...
>> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and since
>I
>> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally. I
>just
>> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my cats
>the
>> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the
>outside
>> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My
>cats
>> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks old.
>For
>> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out more
>> > attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are eating
>> > better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they feel
>> > more secure. They're even learning to get along with the dog.......but
>> > that's another story. <g>
>> >
>> > kilikini
>
Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.


>Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because the
>thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)

You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
>
>Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and are now
>even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done before. I think
>they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now on.

That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.

> Well, at least one
>of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and build
>a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My black and
>white is just loving being indoors.

Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
are.


>
>I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley.

There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.

> I don't usually do that. The
>point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my house
>that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted it back for
>her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I made a *lifetime*
>decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of them when life becomes
>*inconvenient*.

Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
suffering for your cats.

> It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
>would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to do so
>for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an apartment setting
>and my cats aren't free to go out.

Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?

> I could let them out on the lanai, but
>if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down. NO
>thank you.
>
>There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society just
>recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the caught/dropped off,
>unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the new cat house along with
>the old house, can only hold so many and at least 20 cats are put down
>daily.

That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.

And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
indoors only.

>To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
>because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!

Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
get a proper life.

>They'd most likely
>be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than being
>inside where they're loved and cared for?

In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.

>Sorry...........I'm getting
>worked up again. Jeesh!
>
>I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded person and
>I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding my situation.
>Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better or worse, they go
>with me.
>
>kilikini
>
>P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive term.
>Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like Christy.

It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.

--
Bob.

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
public.

[StocksRus®]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:02:36 GMT, "kilikini"
> > wrote:
>
>>"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
m...
>>> Hey Kilikini,
>>> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii
>>> is costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
>>>
>>> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
>>> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The
>>> dude is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
>>>
>>> By the way, what does your name mean?
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>...
>>> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and
>>> > since
>>I
>>> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open -
>>> > literally. I
>>just
>>> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my
>>> > cats
>>the
>>> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and
>>> > the
>>outside
>>> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!
>>> > My
>>cats
>>> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks
>>> > old.
>>For
>>> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out
>>> > more attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they
>>> > are eating better and their personalities are really coming out.
>>> > I think they feel more secure. They're even learning to get along
>>> > with the dog.......but that's another story. <g>
>>> >
>>> > kilikini
>>
> Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
> service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
> Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
> repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
>
>>Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because
>>the thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)
>
> You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
>>
>>Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and
>>are now even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done
>>before. I think they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now
>>on.
>
> That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.
>
>> Well, at least one
>>of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and
>>build a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My
>>black and white is just loving being indoors.
>
> Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
> are.
>
>
>>
>>I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley.
>
> There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.
>
>> I don't usually do that. The
>>point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my
>>house that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted
>>it back for her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I
>>made a *lifetime* decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of
>>them when life becomes *inconvenient*.
>
> Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
> cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
> suffering for your cats.
>
>> It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
>>would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to
>>do so for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an
>>apartment setting and my cats aren't free to go out.
>
> Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
> or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?
>
>> I could let them out on the lanai, but
>>if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down.
>>NO thank you.
>>
>>There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society
>>just recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the
>>caught/dropped off, unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the
>>new cat house along with the old house, can only hold so many and at
>>least 20 cats are put down daily.
>
> That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
> Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
> receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
> 2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
> RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
> works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
> And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.
>
> And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
> indoors only.
>
>>To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
>>because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!
>
> Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
> get a proper life.
>
>>They'd most likely
>>be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than
>>being inside where they're loved and cared for?
>
> In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
> by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.
>
>>Sorry...........I'm getting
>>worked up again. Jeesh!
>>
>>I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded
>>person and I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding
>>my situation. Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better
>>or worse, they go with me.
>>
>>kilikini
>>
>>P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive
>>term. Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like
>>Christy.
>
> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.

Ya know Bob, I agree that some cats need an outdoor life, but you are an
idiot

--
StocksRus®

[StocksRus®]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:02:36 GMT, "kilikini"
> > wrote:
>
>>"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
m...
>>> Hey Kilikini,
>>> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii
>>> is costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
>>>
>>> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
>>> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The
>>> dude is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
>>>
>>> By the way, what does your name mean?
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>...
>>> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and
>>> > since
>>I
>>> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open -
>>> > literally. I
>>just
>>> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my
>>> > cats
>>the
>>> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and
>>> > the
>>outside
>>> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing!
>>> > My
>>cats
>>> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks
>>> > old.
>>For
>>> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out
>>> > more attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they
>>> > are eating better and their personalities are really coming out.
>>> > I think they feel more secure. They're even learning to get along
>>> > with the dog.......but that's another story. <g>
>>> >
>>> > kilikini
>>
> Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
> service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
> Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
> repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
>
>>Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because
>>the thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)
>
> You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
>>
>>Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and
>>are now even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done
>>before. I think they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now
>>on.
>
> That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.
>
>> Well, at least one
>>of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and
>>build a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My
>>black and white is just loving being indoors.
>
> Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
> are.
>
>
>>
>>I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley.
>
> There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.
>
>> I don't usually do that. The
>>point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my
>>house that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted
>>it back for her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I
>>made a *lifetime* decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of
>>them when life becomes *inconvenient*.
>
> Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
> cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
> suffering for your cats.
>
>> It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
>>would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to
>>do so for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an
>>apartment setting and my cats aren't free to go out.
>
> Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
> or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?
>
>> I could let them out on the lanai, but
>>if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down.
>>NO thank you.
>>
>>There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society
>>just recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the
>>caught/dropped off, unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the
>>new cat house along with the old house, can only hold so many and at
>>least 20 cats are put down daily.
>
> That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
> Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
> receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
> 2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
> RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
> works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
> And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.
>
> And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
> indoors only.
>
>>To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
>>because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!
>
> Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
> get a proper life.
>
>>They'd most likely
>>be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than
>>being inside where they're loved and cared for?
>
> In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
> by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.
>
>>Sorry...........I'm getting
>>worked up again. Jeesh!
>>
>>I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded
>>person and I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding
>>my situation. Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better
>>or worse, they go with me.
>>
>>kilikini
>>
>>P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive
>>term. Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like
>>Christy.
>
> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.

Ya know Bob, I agree that some cats need an outdoor life, but you are an
idiot

--
StocksRus®

[Jacqueline]

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:46:32 GMT, "StocksRus®"
> wrote:

>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in
:
>> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.
>
>Ya know Bob, I agree that some cats need an outdoor life, but you are an
>idiot

lol! Indeed. Most cats *should* have an outdoor life if they're safe
from unnatural danger. Unfortuately we've made an environment for them
that isn't safe and so we have to deal with it the best we can.

Bob thinks people with indoor cats are abusers, I think people who let
their cats roam around are either incredibly irresponsible or just
naive. We're all entitiled to our opinion but I find his obnoxious,
petty name-calling style pretty offensive. For someone who moans about
top-posters, he's not very au fait with the other rules of netiquette.

[Jacqueline]

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:46:32 GMT, "StocksRus®"
> wrote:

>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in
:
>> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.
>
>Ya know Bob, I agree that some cats need an outdoor life, but you are an
>idiot

lol! Indeed. Most cats *should* have an outdoor life if they're safe
from unnatural danger. Unfortuately we've made an environment for them
that isn't safe and so we have to deal with it the best we can.

Bob thinks people with indoor cats are abusers, I think people who let
their cats roam around are either incredibly irresponsible or just
naive. We're all entitiled to our opinion but I find his obnoxious,
petty name-calling style pretty offensive. For someone who moans about
top-posters, he's not very au fait with the other rules of netiquette.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 21:06:25 +0000, Jacqueline
> wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:46:32 GMT, "StocksRus®"
> wrote:
>
>>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in
:
>>> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.
>>
>>Ya know Bob, I agree that some cats need an outdoor life, but you are an
>>idiot
>
>lol! Indeed. Most cats *should* have an outdoor life if they're safe
>from unnatural danger. Unfortuately we've made an environment for them
>that isn't safe and so we have to deal with it the best we can.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.
>
>Bob thinks people with indoor cats are abusers, I think people who let
>their cats roam around are either incredibly irresponsible or just
>naive. We're all entitiled to our opinion but I find his obnoxious,
>petty name-calling style pretty offensive. For someone who moans about
>top-posters, he's not very au fait with the other rules of netiquette.

Animal abusers put themselves outside the rules.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 21:06:25 +0000, Jacqueline
> wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:46:32 GMT, "StocksRus®"
> wrote:
>
>>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in
:
>>> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.
>>
>>Ya know Bob, I agree that some cats need an outdoor life, but you are an
>>idiot
>
>lol! Indeed. Most cats *should* have an outdoor life if they're safe
>from unnatural danger. Unfortuately we've made an environment for them
>that isn't safe and so we have to deal with it the best we can.

If you live in an area where, for whatever reason, you feel unable to
allow a healthy cat its freedom to roam for at least some time each
day (and only you can judge your area) then don't have a cat. To have
a healthy cat, knowing you will keep it in 24/7 marks you are being
cruel, selfish, or both.
>
>Bob thinks people with indoor cats are abusers, I think people who let
>their cats roam around are either incredibly irresponsible or just
>naive. We're all entitiled to our opinion but I find his obnoxious,
>petty name-calling style pretty offensive. For someone who moans about
>top-posters, he's not very au fait with the other rules of netiquette.

Animal abusers put themselves outside the rules.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[kilikini]

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:02:36 GMT, "kilikini"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
> m...
> >> Hey Kilikini,
> >> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
> >> costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
> >>
> >> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
> >> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
> >> is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
> >>
> >> By the way, what does your name mean?
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>
> >> "kilikini" > wrote in message
> >...
> >> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and
since
> >I
> >> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally.
I
> >just
> >> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my
cats
> >the
> >> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the
> >outside
> >> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My
> >cats
> >> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks
old.
> >For
> >> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out
more
> >> > attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are
eating
> >> > better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they
feel
> >> > more secure. They're even learning to get along with the
dog.......but
> >> > that's another story. <g>
> >> >
> >> > kilikini
> >
> Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
> service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
> Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
> repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
>
> >Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because
the
> >thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)
>
> You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
> >
> >Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and are
now
> >even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done before. I think
> >they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now on.
>
> That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.
>
> > Well, at least one
> >of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and
build
> >a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My black and
> >white is just loving being indoors.
>
> Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
> are.
>
>
> >
> >I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley.
>
> There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.
>
> > I don't usually do that. The
> >point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my house
> >that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted it back
for
> >her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I made a *lifetime*
> >decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of them when life becomes
> >*inconvenient*.
>
> Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
> cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
> suffering for your cats.
>
> > It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
> >would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to do
so
> >for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an apartment
setting
> >and my cats aren't free to go out.
>
> Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
> or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?
>
> > I could let them out on the lanai, but
> >if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down. NO
> >thank you.
> >
> >There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society just
> >recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the caught/dropped off,
> >unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the new cat house along with
> >the old house, can only hold so many and at least 20 cats are put down
> >daily.
>
> That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
> Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
> receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
> 2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
> RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
> works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
> And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.
>
> And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
> indoors only.
>
> >To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
> >because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!
>
> Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
> get a proper life.
>
> >They'd most likely
> >be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than being
> >inside where they're loved and cared for?
>
> In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
> by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.
>
> >Sorry...........I'm getting
> >worked up again. Jeesh!
> >
> >I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded person
and
> >I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding my situation.
> >Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better or worse, they go
> >with me.
> >
> >kilikini
> >
> >P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive term.
> >Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like Christy.
>
> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
> public.

Oh, Bob............................... <g>
kili

[kilikini]

"Bob Brenchley." > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:02:36 GMT, "kilikini"
> > wrote:
>
> >"Tropical Tim" > wrote in message
> m...
> >> Hey Kilikini,
> >> What a drag having to move like that. I've always heard that Hawaii is
> >> costly to live in, but the rent your paying is awesome.
> >>
> >> Lots of luck with you cats. All of my cats always live indoors. They
> >> love it. Don't ever listen to that weird dude Bob Brenchley. The dude
> >> is a mess. He's about 5 cans short of a sixpack.
> >>
> >> By the way, what does your name mean?
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >>
> >> "kilikini" > wrote in message
> >...
> >> > I've had one of my cats for 8 years and the other for 7 years and
since
> >I
> >> > live in Hawaii it's not a big deal to leave a door open - literally.
I
> >just
> >> > moved to an apartment and I don't have the liberty of allowing my
cats
> >the
> >> > freedeom to go in and out. Now they have to use a litterbox and the
> >outside
> >> > is a vague memory to them. In all honesty, they are flourishing! My
> >cats
> >> > used to be feral; I rescued them when each one was about 10 weeks
old.
> >For
> >> > never being cooped up before, I think they love it. They seek out
more
> >> > attention, they're more loving, they purr more loudly, they are
eating
> >> > better and their personalities are really coming out. I think they
feel
> >> > more secure. They're even learning to get along with the
dog.......but
> >> > that's another story. <g>
> >> >
> >> > kilikini
> >
> Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
> service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
> Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
> repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
>
> >Aloha Tim (and for all of you NG people - I'm only top-posting because
the
> >thread will make more sense this way now it's been started.)
>
> You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
> >
> >Thanks for the encouraging words. My cats are still doing well and are
now
> >even sleeping with me at night, which they've NEVER done before. I think
> >they are going to be permanent indoor cats from now on.
>
> That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.
>
> > Well, at least one
> >of them will be. If I ever get the chance to buy my own property and
build
> >a house I think I'll let my female orange-striped cat out. My black and
> >white is just loving being indoors.
>
> Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
> are.
>
>
> >
> >I got fairly angry at Mr. Bob Brenchley.
>
> There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.
>
> > I don't usually do that. The
> >point I was trying to make was that I was forced to move out of my house
> >that I'd been in for almost 8 years because the landlady wanted it back
for
> >her son who was getting married. When I took on pets I made a *lifetime*
> >decision. They're like kids, you don't get rid of them when life becomes
> >*inconvenient*.
>
> Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
> cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
> suffering for your cats.
>
> > It took me a month and a half to even find a place that
> >would let me take my animals and I'm paying over $500 more a month to do
so
> >for less than half the space I had before. Yes, it's an apartment
setting
> >and my cats aren't free to go out.
>
> Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
> or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?
>
> > I could let them out on the lanai, but
> >if they decide to jump over, well, bye-bye. It's a long drop down. NO
> >thank you.
> >
> >There are over 80,000 feral cats on Maui alone. The humane society just
> >recently built a $250,000 cat house to house all the caught/dropped off,
> >unwanted cats on the island. Unfortunately, the new cat house along with
> >the old house, can only hold so many and at least 20 cats are put down
> >daily.
>
> That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
> Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
> receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
> 2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
> RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
> works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
> And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.
>
> And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
> indoors only.
>
> >To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
> >because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!
>
> Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
> get a proper life.
>
> >They'd most likely
> >be put down! Is having them put down a better thing for them than being
> >inside where they're loved and cared for?
>
> In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
> by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.
>
> >Sorry...........I'm getting
> >worked up again. Jeesh!
> >
> >I didn't mean to rant on because of some trolling, closed-minded person
and
> >I appreciate all the kind words everyone gave me regarding my situation.
> >Point is, I love my animals and where I go, for better or worse, they go
> >with me.
> >
> >kilikini
> >
> >P.S. Kilikini means Christine in Hawaiian - well it's a diminutive term.
> >Kilikina technically means Christine. Kilikini is almost like Christy.
>
> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.
>
> --
> Bob.
>
> I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in
> public.

Oh, Bob............................... <g>
kili

[Tropical Tim]

Yo Bob,
You are such a complete asshole. You are not anything but a slob and a
self proclaimed authority. YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CATS.

Anyone out there in this group needs to just ignore Bob Brenchley and
realize that he is an insane idiot.

People like him always get there just reward. Someone will beat the
crap out of him for us as soon as he opens that big mouth to the wrong
person.

Bob is a TOTAL cat abuser who should himself be put to sleep. Maybe
someone will do that for us too.

*******************************

Everything below this line is bull****.

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...

> Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
> service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
> Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
> repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
> You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
> >
> That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.
>
> Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
> are.
>
> There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.
>
> Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
> cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
> suffering for your cats.
>
> Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
> or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?
>
> That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
> Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
> receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
> 2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
> RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
> works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
> And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.
>
> And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
> indoors only.
>
> >To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
> >because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!
>
> Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
> get a proper life.
>
> In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
> by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.
>
> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.

[Tropical Tim]

Yo Bob,
You are such a complete asshole. You are not anything but a slob and a
self proclaimed authority. YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CATS.

Anyone out there in this group needs to just ignore Bob Brenchley and
realize that he is an insane idiot.

People like him always get there just reward. Someone will beat the
crap out of him for us as soon as he opens that big mouth to the wrong
person.

Bob is a TOTAL cat abuser who should himself be put to sleep. Maybe
someone will do that for us too.

*******************************

Everything below this line is bull****.

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...

> Moronic posting style corrected. You have been charged $25 for this
> service, please remit by international money order as a donation to
> Cats Protection (cats.org.uk) within the next 7 days. Be warned that
> repeated use of this service will incur a escalating rate of charges.
>
> You show both your stupidity and selfishness.
> >
> That shows you as an animal abuser, not a fit owner for cats.
>
> Sadly there are too many animal abusers who delude themselves as you
> are.
>
> There is no full-stop after Mr in the english language.
>
> Then it was YOUR responsibility to find a place to live where your
> cats would get a proper life. You being to lazy to do that now causes
> suffering for your cats.
>
> Then you should either find proper accommodation for you and the cats,
> or find new homes for the cats. Why should they suffer because of you?
>
> That is unacceptable and show how lazy your local shelters are being.
> Only one of our major animal rescue organizations (none of which
> receive a penny of government money) still puts animals to sleep. For
> 2002, the latest year that figures are currently available for, the
> RSPCA put down less that 1,200 nation-wide in the whole year. That
> works out a just over 3 per day - for a country the size of the UK.
> And believe me, we find even that 1,200 a totally unacceptable figure.
>
> And remember, none of our shelters will normally home a healthy cat
> indoors only.
>
> >To have Bob make such a suggestion that I should give my cats up
> >because I can no longer let them outside is ludicrous!
>
> Your cats have rights. You have the responsibility to make sure they
> get a proper life.
>
> In my opinion - yes. The systematic cruelty you inflict of your cats
> by depriving them of a proper life is not acceptable.
>
> It has now taken on a new meaning - animal abuser.

[lakinapook]

Oh boo hoo Bob. I hardly think posting style is the issue here, but
since you are blindly groping for anything to criticize that would
allow you to insult me, then I guess my posting style is as good as
anything to attack. I top post because I prefer to read messages that
way. I don't need a line by line of everything that I have just
gotten through reading. Your posting style of replying at the end
irritates me. I spoke rashly when I called you an idiot. What I
actually believe is that you are ignorant. Ignorant people hold
tenaciously to their beliefs regardless of any logical persuasive
argument, and even in the face of compelling evidence that they are
wrong, will continue to defend their erroneous beliefs.



> The idiot is you - and a top-posting one at that, how much lower on
> the intelligence scale can you get.

[lakinapook]

Oh boo hoo Bob. I hardly think posting style is the issue here, but
since you are blindly groping for anything to criticize that would
allow you to insult me, then I guess my posting style is as good as
anything to attack. I top post because I prefer to read messages that
way. I don't need a line by line of everything that I have just
gotten through reading. Your posting style of replying at the end
irritates me. I spoke rashly when I called you an idiot. What I
actually believe is that you are ignorant. Ignorant people hold
tenaciously to their beliefs regardless of any logical persuasive
argument, and even in the face of compelling evidence that they are
wrong, will continue to defend their erroneous beliefs.



> The idiot is you - and a top-posting one at that, how much lower on
> the intelligence scale can you get.

[Aquagrrl]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...

>
> Abuse Report Filed.

To whom? Your mother?

Any ISP or moderator isn't going to give a flying **** about some
petty complaint about name calling and flame wars. Really, they just
don't care. There are no "feelings police" make people be nice to you.
Its laughable that you think anyone cares.

I hate jumping in on such a stupid post but dear God, you give someone
a little access to the internet, and they become complete morons.

Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
posting is much more common than replying inline. Like the addition of
the word ain't to the dictionary, it may not make the best sense, but
it is acceptable.

I'm sure you live a miserable small life where no one notices you,
which is why you've chosen to be such an obvious thorn in everyone's
side, but here is another hint : you still don't matter. Validating
your existence through the people you **** off is probably the saddest
thing I have seen so far.

[Aquagrrl]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...

>
> Abuse Report Filed.

To whom? Your mother?

Any ISP or moderator isn't going to give a flying **** about some
petty complaint about name calling and flame wars. Really, they just
don't care. There are no "feelings police" make people be nice to you.
Its laughable that you think anyone cares.

I hate jumping in on such a stupid post but dear God, you give someone
a little access to the internet, and they become complete morons.

Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
posting is much more common than replying inline. Like the addition of
the word ain't to the dictionary, it may not make the best sense, but
it is acceptable.

I'm sure you live a miserable small life where no one notices you,
which is why you've chosen to be such an obvious thorn in everyone's
side, but here is another hint : you still don't matter. Validating
your existence through the people you **** off is probably the saddest
thing I have seen so far.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:

>Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
>the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
>in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
>are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
>things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
>posting is much more common than replying inline.

Only to ignorant or selfish people.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:

>Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
>the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
>in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
>are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
>things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
>posting is much more common than replying inline.

Only to ignorant or selfish people.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson. Please pass it to all your
friends so they may learn as well.

[Tropical Tim]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...
> On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:
>
> >Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
> >the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
> >in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
> >are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
> >things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
> >posting is much more common than replying inline.
>
> Only to ignorant or selfish people.

No Bob, you are the selfish, ignorant person. If someone is responding
to a particular statement within a posting, then yes, please do quote
that statement just above your reply.

If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

All of you should know by now that Bob Brenchley is a fool and a
troll. He is most likly the only person in the world that thinks of
him as anything else. Please DO post at the top if you are replying to
the entire post and just delete the "old post". That way it saves
bandwidth, time, and a lot of unnecessary reading.

Thanks,

Tim

[Tropical Tim]

Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...
> On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:
>
> >Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
> >the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
> >in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
> >are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
> >things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
> >posting is much more common than replying inline.
>
> Only to ignorant or selfish people.

No Bob, you are the selfish, ignorant person. If someone is responding
to a particular statement within a posting, then yes, please do quote
that statement just above your reply.

If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

All of you should know by now that Bob Brenchley is a fool and a
troll. He is most likly the only person in the world that thinks of
him as anything else. Please DO post at the top if you are replying to
the entire post and just delete the "old post". That way it saves
bandwidth, time, and a lot of unnecessary reading.

Thanks,

Tim

[Gwenhwyfaer de Tierveil]

Quoth Tropical Tim:
> If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
> post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
> lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
> reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

It's even more of a pain to scroll through the rest of the message
anyway, only to discover that 50 lines of message have been quoted
with no attempt to prune for context. It's also a waste of bandwidth
(and outside of 10pm til 8am, I pay for mine by the 5k).

Please, if you're responding to a message generally, note that all you
really need to quote of that message is enough context to let the rest
of us know which message you're responding to! After that, whether
you're responding at the top or the bottom is insignificant - it just
flows more like a conversation if you bottom-post.

The old Pnews program used to reject posts if you quoted more text than
you originated. Sometimes I miss that. :)
--
Gwenhwyfaer (a plea from the bandwidth-impoverished)

some girls wander by themselves

[Gwenhwyfaer de Tierveil]

Quoth Tropical Tim:
> If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
> post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
> lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
> reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

It's even more of a pain to scroll through the rest of the message
anyway, only to discover that 50 lines of message have been quoted
with no attempt to prune for context. It's also a waste of bandwidth
(and outside of 10pm til 8am, I pay for mine by the 5k).

Please, if you're responding to a message generally, note that all you
really need to quote of that message is enough context to let the rest
of us know which message you're responding to! After that, whether
you're responding at the top or the bottom is insignificant - it just
flows more like a conversation if you bottom-post.

The old Pnews program used to reject posts if you quoted more text than
you originated. Sometimes I miss that. :)
--
Gwenhwyfaer (a plea from the bandwidth-impoverished)

some girls wander by themselves

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 2 Mar 2004 06:20:59 -0800, (Tropical Tim)
wrote:

>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...
>> On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:
>>
>> >Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
>> >the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
>> >in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
>> >are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
>> >things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
>> >posting is much more common than replying inline.
>>
>> Only to ignorant or selfish people.
>
>No Bob, you are the selfish, ignorant person. If someone is responding
>to a particular statement within a posting, then yes, please do quote
>that statement just above your reply.
>
>If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
>post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
>lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
>reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
of the person doing it.
>
>All of you should know by now that Bob Brenchley is a fool and a
>troll. He is most likly the only person in the world that thinks of
>him as anything else. Please DO post at the top if you are replying to
>the entire post and just delete the "old post". That way it saves
>bandwidth, time, and a lot of unnecessary reading.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Tim

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson - however, I reserve the
legal right to charge you for future lessons if you fail to take this
opportunity to correct your errant ways.

[Bob Brenchley.]

On 2 Mar 2004 06:20:59 -0800, (Tropical Tim)
wrote:

>Bob Brenchley. > wrote in message >...
>> On 29 Feb 2004 17:01:42 -0800, (Aquagrrl) wrote:
>>
>> >Bob, I don't know you nor do I care to know you, but you are one of
>> >the most amusingly stupid trolls I've had the pleasure to come across
>> >in a long time. A hint, you're not so "leet' anymore just because you
>> >are aware of the "old" rules for posting in usenet. Like many other
>> >things on the internet, netiquette is constantly evolving, and top
>> >posting is much more common than replying inline.
>>
>> Only to ignorant or selfish people.
>
>No Bob, you are the selfish, ignorant person. If someone is responding
>to a particular statement within a posting, then yes, please do quote
>that statement just above your reply.
>
>If you are responding to the entire posting in general, please, please
>post at the top. It's really stupid to have to scroll though countless
>lines of the same posting time after time just to get to a one line
>reply at the damn bottom of all of it.

Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
of the person doing it.
>
>All of you should know by now that Bob Brenchley is a fool and a
>troll. He is most likly the only person in the world that thinks of
>him as anything else. Please DO post at the top if you are replying to
>the entire post and just delete the "old post". That way it saves
>bandwidth, time, and a lot of unnecessary reading.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Tim

It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.

Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

--
Bob.

You have not been charged for this lesson - however, I reserve the
legal right to charge you for future lessons if you fail to take this
opportunity to correct your errant ways.

[AK]

I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
flamed!

There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
animals. In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out. My cat has a cat flap
and he comes and goes as he pleases, we are nowhere near road traffic, in
fact we have a large lake and about 25 swans that he has made friends with.
My last cat lived for 17 years and came to no harm, this one is 5 and vey
healthy. However I know it is very different in the US as there are many
predators there, so you tend to have the opposite with most cats staying in.

Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
either way in my opinion. However to say Bob is an abusive pet owner is not
strickly fair. He may certainly be abusive, but he is not an abusive pet
owner by allowing his cat outside, about 30 million other Brits do exactly
the same, in fact I don't know a cat owner that doesn't. I watch one of
your programmes - Aminal Cops I think it is called (the ones based in New
York and Michigan) - now thos that appear on there well they most certainly
are abusive pet owners!!

AK

[AK]

I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
flamed!

There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
animals. In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out. My cat has a cat flap
and he comes and goes as he pleases, we are nowhere near road traffic, in
fact we have a large lake and about 25 swans that he has made friends with.
My last cat lived for 17 years and came to no harm, this one is 5 and vey
healthy. However I know it is very different in the US as there are many
predators there, so you tend to have the opposite with most cats staying in.

Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
either way in my opinion. However to say Bob is an abusive pet owner is not
strickly fair. He may certainly be abusive, but he is not an abusive pet
owner by allowing his cat outside, about 30 million other Brits do exactly
the same, in fact I don't know a cat owner that doesn't. I watch one of
your programmes - Aminal Cops I think it is called (the ones based in New
York and Michigan) - now thos that appear on there well they most certainly
are abusive pet owners!!

AK

[Jacqueline]

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:44:15 -0000, "AK" > wrote:

>I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
>flamed!
>
>There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
>cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
>animals.

Foxes, dogs? I had a cat attacked by 2 pitbulls. I had another cat who
got attacked by a whippet - but fortutately she got the upper hand and
ripped the hell out of it :-p That was luck more than anything,
because that particular dog had killed at least 2 cats prior (I knew
the owner and he confimed this).

> In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out.

It is the norm now but it's certainly changing. Ten years ago I never
knew *anyone* who kept a cat indoors (me included). Now I can think of
quite a number of people I've come into contact with socially and
through rescue organisations who do so, after years of losing cats to
human intervention.

The area I live in certainly used to be 'safe'. But in recent years
we've had a fair spate of poisonings and cats (and dogs) mysteriously
going missing, local speculation being they're taken for underground
dog fights. I also had a neighbour who took umbrage at my cats walking
along his fence and thought it was acceptable to shoot them with an
air rifle. There's also been a lot of building work around here,
houses springing up everywhere bringing with them more roads and
people and traffic.I suppose you could say, well, these things happen,
got to let animals take risks, but I don't believe that. It's my
responsibility to look after my animals and I do so to the best of my
ability. It would suit me to have them out most of the day, then I
wouldn't have to worry about keeping them entertained!


>Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
>as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
>either way in my opinion.

Ideally a cat should be free to roam, there's no question. But
changing environments mean adapting to the safest means. If I had lots
of fields and no road or railway or animal-haters near me, my cats
could wander in and out as they please. As it happens, I can't afford
to give up my home of over 20 years because the landscape around me
has changed. Maybe one day when I'm rich...

[Jacqueline]

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:44:15 -0000, "AK" > wrote:

>I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
>flamed!
>
>There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
>cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by other
>animals.

Foxes, dogs? I had a cat attacked by 2 pitbulls. I had another cat who
got attacked by a whippet - but fortutately she got the upper hand and
ripped the hell out of it :-p That was luck more than anything,
because that particular dog had killed at least 2 cats prior (I knew
the owner and he confimed this).

> In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out.

It is the norm now but it's certainly changing. Ten years ago I never
knew *anyone* who kept a cat indoors (me included). Now I can think of
quite a number of people I've come into contact with socially and
through rescue organisations who do so, after years of losing cats to
human intervention.

The area I live in certainly used to be 'safe'. But in recent years
we've had a fair spate of poisonings and cats (and dogs) mysteriously
going missing, local speculation being they're taken for underground
dog fights. I also had a neighbour who took umbrage at my cats walking
along his fence and thought it was acceptable to shoot them with an
air rifle. There's also been a lot of building work around here,
houses springing up everywhere bringing with them more roads and
people and traffic.I suppose you could say, well, these things happen,
got to let animals take risks, but I don't believe that. It's my
responsibility to look after my animals and I do so to the best of my
ability. It would suit me to have them out most of the day, then I
wouldn't have to worry about keeping them entertained!


>Like I said it is preference and each way brings it's own difficulties, but
>as long as a cat is well looked after and stimulated there is no problem
>either way in my opinion.

Ideally a cat should be free to roam, there's no question. But
changing environments mean adapting to the safest means. If I had lots
of fields and no road or railway or animal-haters near me, my cats
could wander in and out as they please. As it happens, I can't afford
to give up my home of over 20 years because the landscape around me
has changed. Maybe one day when I'm rich...

[Chaney]

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...

--

Chaney

Chaney's World
www.chaney.i12.com
"John Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:10:53 +0000, in article
> >, Bob Brenchley.
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
> >of the person doing it.
> >>
>
> As does not trimming the original post to only the relevant parts.
> This also shows the ignorance of the person doing it, particularly
> when they are trying to reprimand others for breaching netiquette
> guidelines.
>
> >
> >It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
> >http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.
> >
> >Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
> >inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.
>
> Pot, kettle, black eh Bob?
>
> It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
> http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.
>
> Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
> inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

[Chaney]

Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
reply...

--

Chaney

Chaney's World
www.chaney.i12.com
"John Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 10:10:53 +0000, in article
> >, Bob Brenchley.
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >Rubbish. Top posting is never justified and just shows the ignorance
> >of the person doing it.
> >>
>
> As does not trimming the original post to only the relevant parts.
> This also shows the ignorance of the person doing it, particularly
> when they are trying to reprimand others for breaching netiquette
> guidelines.
>
> >
> >It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
> >http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.
> >
> >Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
> >inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.
>
> Pot, kettle, black eh Bob?
>
> It is about time you learnt how to format a proper usenet post/reply.
> http://www.uwasa.fi/~ts/http/quote.html will give you a good start.
>
> Failure to learn will label you either a moron or a selfish,
> inconsiderate, illiterate plonker - it is all down to you.

[Ted Davis]

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:02:22 -0000, "Chaney" > wrote:

>Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
>posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
>it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
>not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
>about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
>reply...

Bottom quoting, to call it what it really is, is a Microsoft invention
- pushed on users *because it is the opposite of common practice and
common sense*.


T.E.D. - e-mail must contain "T.E.D." or my .sig in the body)

[Ted Davis]

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 21:02:22 -0000, "Chaney" > wrote:

>Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
>posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
>it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
>not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
>about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
>reply...

Bottom quoting, to call it what it really is, is a Microsoft invention
- pushed on users *because it is the opposite of common practice and
common sense*.


T.E.D. - e-mail must contain "T.E.D." or my .sig in the body)

[Tim May]

In article >, Chaney
> wrote:

> Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
> posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
> it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
> not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
> about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
> reply...


I was posting in 1988 and definitely didn't see _either_ top- or
bottom-posting as the norm. What I saw amongst the clueful was
judicious editing and a habit of starting a reply on the first
screenful of quoted text.

For long quoted posts, this usually means "middle-posting."

For this post here, where I only quoted a paragraph, posting after the
quote makes sense.

Top-posting is sometimes OK, but is usually inferior to at least
providing _some_ context.

Mostly I wish people would learn to use their editos instead of quoting
a long article and adding some short comment at the top (or the
bottom).

--Tim May

[Tim May]

In article >, Chaney
> wrote:

> Didn't see the start of this thread...but...you find it in every ng...top
> posting was the norm 10+ years ago...some ng's frown on it...some ng's love
> it...I still do it coz I was doing it 10+ years ago...I'm not a moron...I'm
> not inconsiderate...a plonker maybe...BUT...you know what the post is
> about...and now you don't have to trawl through tons of sh*t to read my
> reply...


I was posting in 1988 and definitely didn't see _either_ top- or
bottom-posting as the norm. What I saw amongst the clueful was
judicious editing and a habit of starting a reply on the first
screenful of quoted text.

For long quoted posts, this usually means "middle-posting."

For this post here, where I only quoted a paragraph, posting after the
quote makes sense.

Top-posting is sometimes OK, but is usually inferior to at least
providing _some_ context.

Mostly I wish people would learn to use their editos instead of quoting
a long article and adding some short comment at the top (or the
bottom).

--Tim May

[Tim May]

In article >, Ted Davis
> wrote:

>
> Bottom quoting, to call it what it really is, is a Microsoft invention
> - pushed on users *because it is the opposite of common practice and
> common sense*.

Nonsense. Both top- and bottom-posting are artifacts of not bothering
to edit quoted material. Both were being used by the lazy long before
Microsoft Explorer or Outlook or whatever it is you think is a MS plot
to encourage some particular style.

--Tim May

[Tim May]

In article >, Ted Davis
> wrote:

>
> Bottom quoting, to call it what it really is, is a Microsoft invention
> - pushed on users *because it is the opposite of common practice and
> common sense*.

Nonsense. Both top- and bottom-posting are artifacts of not bothering
to edit quoted material. Both were being used by the lazy long before
Microsoft Explorer or Outlook or whatever it is you think is a MS plot
to encourage some particular style.

--Tim May

[kilikini]

"Jacqueline" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:44:15 -0000, "AK" > wrote:
>
> >I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
> >flamed!
> >
> >There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
> >cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by
other
> >animals.
>

(snip)

Cats don't have to be killed just by other animals. I live in an area of
the U.S. where there is a HUGE foreigner population. If a cat crosses into
a neighbor's yard, quite often it is killed and put into the neighbor's
dinner. NOT KIDDING! Cats are missing all of the time. It's a local
"joke" to say, oh, your neighbor ate it, but it's really not a joke. My
last neighborhood was mostly caucasion so I didn't have a problem with
letting my cats out. I currently live in a different area that is locally
known for eating dogs and cats (I watched a dog get beaten to its death this
last Christmas day for the family's Christmas dinner - again, I am NOT
kidding). Thank god I live in an apartment setting where I can't let my
cats out.

kilikini

[kilikini]

"Jacqueline" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 18:44:15 -0000, "AK" > wrote:
>
> >I tentatively add to this thread, just my opinion, hopefully I won't get
> >flamed!
> >
> >There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I live
> >cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed by
other
> >animals.
>

(snip)

Cats don't have to be killed just by other animals. I live in an area of
the U.S. where there is a HUGE foreigner population. If a cat crosses into
a neighbor's yard, quite often it is killed and put into the neighbor's
dinner. NOT KIDDING! Cats are missing all of the time. It's a local
"joke" to say, oh, your neighbor ate it, but it's really not a joke. My
last neighborhood was mostly caucasion so I didn't have a problem with
letting my cats out. I currently live in a different area that is locally
known for eating dogs and cats (I watched a dog get beaten to its death this
last Christmas day for the family's Christmas dinner - again, I am NOT
kidding). Thank god I live in an apartment setting where I can't let my
cats out.

kilikini

[Gwenhwyfaer de Tierveil]

Quoth AK:
> There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I
> live cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed
> by other animals. In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out. My cat

True enough; it's fairly normal to let dogs out too. However, cats do
have one unnatural predator in the UK - humans; some humans simply don't
know how to treat animals. If I know that the guy 5 doors down likes to
take pot shots at animals, or I find one of my cats coming home with a
lead pellet in his or her flank, I'm not going to be entirely encouraged
to let my cats out in future.(However, I'll also be looking to move to a
better area...)

There is also the issue of feline overcrowding; simply put, there are so
many pet cats in Britain that they're having serious knock-on effects on
the native wildlife (small birds, rodents, etc), and they're also in far
heavier competition for territory than they used to be. Catfights can
get nasty - it's not unheard of for a cat to lose an eye in a fight -
and you can't always hear your cats... plus if you do the responsible
thing and have your cats neutered, they're at an automatic disadvantage
to any intact cats that come along.

Even in the UK, indoor or outdoor is not a cut-and-dried issue.

> has a cat flap and he comes and goes as he pleases, we are nowhere
> near road traffic, in fact we have a large lake and about 25 swans
> that he has made friends with.

Ooh, I'm all envious! So is Firstborn...
--
Gwenhwyfaer (sand and green really don't mix on a cat)

some girls wander by themselves

[Gwenhwyfaer de Tierveil]

Quoth AK:
> There is no right or wrong answer to this issue. In the UK where I
> live cats have no natural predators so cats are not going to be killed
> by other animals. In the UK it is the norm to allow cats out. My cat

True enough; it's fairly normal to let dogs out too. However, cats do
have one unnatural predator in the UK - humans; some humans simply don't
know how to treat animals. If I know that the guy 5 doors down likes to
take pot shots at animals, or I find one of my cats coming home with a
lead pellet in his or her flank, I'm not going to be entirely encouraged
to let my cats out in future.(However, I'll also be looking to move to a
better area...)

There is also the issue of feline overcrowding; simply put, there are so
many pet cats in Britain that they're having serious knock-on effects on
the native wildlife (small birds, rodents, etc), and they're also in far
heavier competition for territory than they used to be. Catfights can
get nasty - it's not unheard of for a cat to lose an eye in a fight -
and you can't always hear your cats... plus if you do the responsible
thing and have your cats neutered, they're at an automatic disadvantage
to any intact cats that come along.

Even in the UK, indoor or outdoor is not a cut-and-dried issue.

> has a cat flap and he comes and goes as he pleases, we are nowhere
> near road traffic, in fact we have a large lake and about 25 swans
> that he has made friends with.

Ooh, I'm all envious! So is Firstborn...
--
Gwenhwyfaer (sand and green really don't mix on a cat)

some girls wander by themselves

[[email protected]]

>
>Please, if you're responding to a message generally, note that all you
>really need to quote of that message is enough context to let the rest
>of us know which message you're responding to! After that, whether
>you're responding at the top or the bottom is insignificant - it just

Yes

[[email protected]]

>
>Please, if you're responding to a message generally, note that all you
>really need to quote of that message is enough context to let the rest
>of us know which message you're responding to! After that, whether
>you're responding at the top or the bottom is insignificant - it just

Yes

[Another]

Tim has it exactly right. Though some writers are so good and other
readers so patient that the question does not arise, most of us
appreciate the few seconds of editing that retain the gist of a
discussion without filling the screen with excess characters.

George

>Mostly I wish people would learn to use their editos instead of quoting
>a long article and adding some short comment at the top (or the
>bottom).
>
>--Tim May

[Another]

Tim has it exactly right. Though some writers are so good and other
readers so patient that the question does not arise, most of us
appreciate the few seconds of editing that retain the gist of a
discussion without filling the screen with excess characters.

George

>Mostly I wish people would learn to use their editos instead of quoting
>a long article and adding some short comment at the top (or the
>bottom).
>
>--Tim May